Foes Mixer Trail - Review

Jan 18, 2016
by Richard Cunningham  



Foes Racing released the Mixer Trail at the 2015 Interbike expo in Las Vegas, but the bike had been in development for over two years in collaboration with Timberline Cycles - one of their top retailers and an avid proponent of mixed wheel mountain bikes, both for their ability to roll over rough ground smoothly like a 29er, and reportedly, for being able to out corner either a 29er or a 27.5-inch-wheel bike. "Mixer" refers to its 27.5-inch rear wheel and 29-inch front wheel, and it is available in two models: the Trail (which we review here) with either 5.5 or six inches of adjustable rear-wheel travel; and the Enduro, which has a slightly slacker angles and either 6.3 or seven inches of rear-wheel travel.

The Mixer's welded-aluminum frame employs Brent Foes' signature hydroformed monocoque top tube; time-proven triangulated, single-pivot rear suspension; and a low-leverage, linkage-driven shock (a Fox Float EVOL, for the Mixer Trail). 2016 models feature Boost 148 x 12 millimeter axle spacing and the recommended fork travel for the Trail is 140 to 150 millimeters. Foes Racing offers complete build kits by request but prefers to sell the Mixer as a frame and shock for $2,700. Weight of the frame with the Fox Float EVOL damper is stated as 7.2 pounds, and our medium-sized bike, built up with SRAM GX components, Stan’s Flow wheels, and a DVO Diamond 29 fork weighed 30.8 pounds with an estimated MSRP of $6,000 USD.



Details:
• Purpose: trail/all-mountain
• Construction: Aluminum chassis, linkage-driven single-pivot type suspension, replaceable ISCG 05 mounts, Boost 148mm hub spacing
• Wheel sizes: 29" front, 27.5" rear
• Suspension travel: Adjustable, 5.5" to 6" (140/152mm)
• Low-leverage, 2.3:1 suspension design
• Full-complement, double sealed pivot bearings
• Shock: Fox Float EVOL
• Fork: DVO Diamond 29, 150mm stroke
• Sizes: small, medium, large
• Weight as tested: 30.8 lbs/14kg (M)
• Weight (frame w/ shock): 7.2 lbs/3.72kg (M)
• MSRP: $2,700 USD (frame w/ shock), $6,000 USD as tested
Foes Racing
FOES Mixer


Construction

Brent Foes' love affair with welded aluminum frames has led him to purchase his own presses to form his trademark monocoque top tubes and the CNC machining centers with which he produces the various pivot junctions, frame yokes, dropouts, as well as specialized hardware and axle shafts that connect the chassis. Brent can and does operate every machine in the shop when necessary, so if you purchase a Mixer, there is a good chance that he has personally fabricated and welded most of its frame.

FOES Mixer


Suspension: The switch to one-by drivetrains has benefitted Foes' single-pivot swingarm design by stabilizing the geometry between forward swingarm pivot and the point where the chain intersects the top of the chainring. The result is that the effects of chain tension over the suspension can be tuned more consistently to provide a proper balance between pedaling firmness and smooth suspension action.

To enhance the sensitivity of the shock's spring and its adjustments, Foes uses a low-leverage linkage coupled with a longer-stroke shock. Foes state that the Mixer's average rate is 2.3 to one, compared to the industry average of three to one. A lower leverage rate drives the shock shaft at a faster speed, which in turn multiplies the effects of damping changes and reduces the spring rate necessary to support the rider. The short version is that a lower leverage rate broadens the shock's range of tuning options.

A pair of mounting positions for the shock on the rocker link provide either 5.5 inches or six inches (140 to 152mm) of wheel travel without altering the bottom bracket height or the frame geometry. Predictably, the recommended fork strokes are 140 or 150 millimeters. We did all of our riding with the shock set in the 140-millimeter position because the rear suspension felt supple with excellent pedaling support. The bike's DVO Diamond fork's travel is adjustable from 140 to 160 millimeters in ten-millimeter increments. It arrived at 150 millimeters, which is correct for the Mixer's geometry.
FOES Mixer
A short, four-inch head tube helps minimize the additional stack height of the 29-inch wheel and fork.

Fabrication: Welding and construction is expertly done throughout the Mixer's frame. Brent doesn't like his frames flexing, so he tends to beef up the CNC-machined bits where the frame tubes are joined to the swingarm and pivot locations. To keep the swingarm pivots hassle free, Foes uses full complement ball bearings, which are more suited to the suspension's high loads and smaller rotation angles. When I picked up the bike, Brent told me that the tire clearance was too close at the lower swingarm yoke because he had shortened the chainstays slightly, and the second-gen production parts had not been completed in time to get our test bike assembled. I was assured that customers would receive the high-clearance yoke.

FOES Mixer
Foes' swingarm pivot location produces a near-perfect balance between pedaling firmness and unhindered suspension action.
FOES Mixer
Thankfully, the ultra-tight tire clearance at the lower swingarm junction is not going to see production.


Frame details include rubber seals for the internal dropper post routing, a beefy CNC-machined axle nut that doubles as a rear derailleur hanger, a long enough seat tube to allow for 150-millimeter dropper posts and a threaded bottom bracket shell with a removable ISCG 05 guide mount. The downtube seems to have room for a single water bottle, but there are no bosses. I am sure that Foes will field a few complaints about the missing bottle bosses, but I doubt that anyone will have a problem with the fact that there is no provision for a front derailleur on the Mixer's frame. Except for the internal dropper post, all the cables and housings are externally routed and jacketed full length to keep crud from affecting the controls. Finally, Foes incorporated the wider Boost 148 x 12 millimeter rear-axle standard, presumably to obtain a better chain line while making room for 2.4 and 2.5-inch rubber out back


Geometry

The Mixer Trail's 67.5-degree head angle is a little steep by current standards. The medium-sized frame sports a 23.25-inch top tube (59cm) that, in conjunction with its 73-degree seat tube angle, produces a reach measurement near 16.5 inches (420mm). The chainstays are nice and short at 17.1 inches (432mm) and, at 13.75-inches static, the bottom bracket is just tall enough so that riders don't have to fear repeatedly catching the pedals on ungroomed trails. Just looking at the numbers, I would have expected the Mixer Trail to feel a little short, but easy to move around, and perhaps a little sketchy dropping down steep trails. I'm glad I didn't look at the numbers before I rode the bike.

Foes Mixer Trail 2016
FOES Mixer


Key Components

Foes primarily sells frames, but they do offer a number of build kits. Our Mixer Trail was outfitted with Foes' more economical component selection. It is doubtful that a rider serious enough to buy a $900 DVO Diamond fork and a $400 Thomson Elite dropper post would also choose SRAM's least expensive GX1 drivetrain and relatively inexpensive brakes. The folks at Foes, however, understand where to spend the money when it comes to performance. We appreciated the post, the fork, and the Fox Float EVOL shock, and we would soon discover that Stan's Flow EX wheels and 2.3-inch WTB Vigilante tires also played well together. Eclectic, but a very functional component pick.




bigquotesA scorching personal best run down a relentless succession of twists and turns that are a test of both pedaling and cornering skills. Not bad for a first date with a new bike.

If I had any preconceptions of how the Foes Mixer Trail would perform, they were shaped by the Liteville 601 review I did in March 2015. The 601 had a 26-inch rear wheel, paired with a 27.5-inch front wheel and it turned corners like a centrifuge. The Mixer Trail, with its slightly larger, 29 by 27.5-inch wheel combination backed up the 601's performance with a scorching personal best run down a relentless succession of twists and turns that are a test of both pedaling and cornering skills. Not bad for a first date with a new bike.

Setup: Outfitted with a 29-inch front wheel and respectably large, 2.3-inch tires, the Mixer's handlebar sits tall. With the 140-millimeter-travel fork, the center of the grip measured 41.75 inches from level ground, which is .75 inches taller than the handlebar on my 160-millimeter-travel 27.5-wheel bike. I could have halved that figure by switching out the one remaining, ten-millimeter spacer under the stem, but I chose to leave it as is because I would be the smallest test rider participating in the review. Outside of the stack, which was typical of most any 29er with a similar fork, the Mixer felt roomy enough in the cockpit to comfortably climb and descend while out of the saddle, but riders closer to six feet tall will probably want to size up to a large frame.

Suspension settings were pretty straight-forward, with the shock sagged to 25 percent and the fork just shy of 20 percent. I found that the Fox EVOL shock worked well with the rebound set a bit faster than I was used to, guessing that was probably necessary to balance the smoothness of the larger front wheel in the rocks and chatter. In retrospect, however, I was probably compensating for the Foes' reduced leverage rate and faster shaft speeds. Similar to the Cane Creek DBair shock, when the DVO fork is set up well, it seems like its low-speed compression and rebound are too slow in a parking lot test. I often ran the low-speed compression in the middle position, with the high-speed set about one-fourth of the way in, which is on the stiff side according to the DVO setup information, but it felt smooth and provided ample support for descending steeps.

Pedaling and climbing effectiveness fell into the center, somewhere between what I would expect from a longer travel enduro bike like a Santa Cruz Nomad, and a shorter travel 29er trail bike like the Intense Carbine. Standing or seated, the Foes' suspension kinematics provide a good feel at the pedals. There was a little lag when I was accelerating from a dead stop, but once I had some momentum, the Mixer maintained speed with surprisingly little effort. The same sensation was true for climbing, and I learned that to keep the bike moving at the cost of an initial burst of energy was more effective than slogging up a technical section at a low rpm.
FOES Mixer
The 30-pound Mixer turned out to be a very good technical climber.

The big front wheel blunts the edges of roots and rocks, which often meant that I could choose a straighter, slightly rougher line without wasting energy - a tactic that paid dividends up steep, techy climbs and doubled my success rate. For similar reasons, I found the Mixer's combination of wheel sizes simplified the task of powering up and around uphill switchbacks. I could concentrate on maintaining rear wheel traction once I learned to trust that the front wheel would track smoothly over ruts, and embedded rocks that had given me trouble before, and the Mixer managed a tighter line than any 29er I can remember riding on the same trails.

FOES Mixer

bigquotesThe Mixer's steering is responsive. It doesn't suffer from the lackluster turn-in that is common among 29ers, especially ones with slack geometry.

Turns: As mentioned, the highlight of the Mixer's performance is its uncanny cornering ability. Perhaps the slight differential in the diameter of the tires causes the bike to carve a tighter arc. However it works, hard cornering forces and abrupt corner entries rarely cause the front tire to push, and the bike holds its line without being distracted by uneven trail surfaces. At the handlebar, the slower response of the larger, 29-inch wheel can be sensed, but the Mixer's steering is responsive. It doesn't suffer from the lackluster turn-in that is common among 29ers, especially ones with slack geometry.

Descending and technical riding: Contemporary designers treat trail bikes with head angles steeper than 65 degrees like Ebola virus, and had I known that the Mixer's head angle was 67.5 degrees before I began riding it, I may have held back or at least reconsidered some of the technical lines I descended during testing.

If you had asked me then, I would have guessed its head tube angle was somewhere around 65 degrees. The front end rolls out of near vertical drops to flat, and I could put a lot of pressure on the front wheel and steer with confidence down tricky chutes. Under braking, the Foes remains calm and level, and rarely if ever will it push the front tire if you overcook a turn.

The aluminum chassis is stiff, and that also adds confidence both at speed and in the rough, and there is just enough quality suspension travel on each end to keep you out of trouble should you forget in your enthusiasm that the Mixer Trail is not actually a fully-fledged enduro racing sled. The Mixer is capable and easy to handle - which means that it encourages its owner to ride it to the O-rings on downhill tracks. If that is you, Foes makes an enduro version with an inch more travel and a slightly longer and slacker chassis for about the same money.

Overall impressions: If you have garnered that the Mixer Trail is an easy bike to ride, you got the message. How much the mixed diameter wheels play into that equation is hard to quantify, but there can be no doubt that having a slightly larger front wheel creates some magic in the way that it turns corners at any speed and intensity, and to a lesser extent, in the ease with which it negotiates rough or steep terrain.

Studies done by Liteville's Jo Klieber indicate that nearly all of the terrain-leveling action that is attributed to a 29er's superior rolling efficiency is generated at the front wheel. Riding comparisons indicate that moderately biased wheel diameters improve a bike's stability while cornering. Big-wheel/small-wheel bikes were sold before by the likes of Cannondale, Specialized and Trek, but in diameters that were grossly mismatched (24" x 26" and 26" x 29"). The injection of the 27.5-inch wheel between 29 and 26 provided the necessary half-step, which seems to have achieved the correct turning arcs and slip angles to make the concept work.
FOES Mixer

bigquotesStudies done by Liteville's Jo Klieber indicate that nearly all of the terrain-leveling action that is attributed to a 29er's superior rolling efficiency is generated at the front wheel.

FOES Mixer
Like a boss - Harold Preston sends the fearless Foes off a tight, left-hand step-down bunker.


Technical Issues

Two Wheel Diameters: Technically, mixed wheel diameters should not create issues for customers because most wheelsets are also are sold as individuals, tubeless has reduced the need to carry spares to one emergency tube, and the 27.5-inch size can service all three tire diameters.

Tall Stack Height: There is no escaping the Mixer's handlebar height, caused by the addition of a long-travel fork to an already tall, 29-inch front wheel. Foes made the head tube as short as possible, but even flat handlebars will not lower the grips enough for small riders to properly weight the front wheel or to find a decent climbing position. One option would be reducing suspension travel, but that robs the fun. Another option would be to offer a second model with 26 and 27.5-inch wheels.

Tire Clearance: Brent Foes promised that the Mixer's lower swingarm yoke would be modified for production to provide ample tire clearance. We were surprised, however, that the arch of the DVO fork was as close to rubbing the Mixer's front tire as the swingarm was to the rear tire. DVO reportedly has a new casting in the works for its 29er models that will fix the problem. Until then, if you ride in mud and slop, you might consider skinny tires or a different fork.

DVO Diamond Fork: I was not overly impressed with the Diamond's performance until I got the tune right, after which it delivered exactly what a mid-travel trail bike needs: lots of support, just enough small-bump compliance to ensure traction, and a smooth ramp-up to the end-stroke to handle substantial jumps and drops.
FOES Mixer

WTB Vigilante Tires: I called Vigilante tires "High Plains Drifters" because when pushed to their limits on sunbaked trails, they would lose grip with little warning. Moisture in the soil, however, brought their fangs out. Once the tread could penetrate the trail surface, the grip and control they offered were significantly better than that original experience.



Pinkbike's Take:

bigquotesFoes' Mixer Trail goes beyond demonstrating that mixed wheel sizes can improve performance. It reminds us that there are more ingredients left to discover in our quest to create the ultimate mountain bike. After over a year of riding ten-thousand-dollar, slacked-out, big-travel, enduro-inspired superbikes, I was pretty sure that one of them would become my all-time favorite. Then, Brent Foes walks into the picture and says: "Hey, did you know that if you put a bigger front wheel on your fashionable mid-travel trail bike, it will be able to hit all the big stuff and still be fun to ride everywhere else?" It seemed too easy, but after three months on the Mixer Trail, I have to admit that he's right. -RC



Visit the review gallery for additional and full-size images.



About the Rider
Stats: Age: 38 • Height: 5'9” • Weight: 170lb • Industry affiliations: Owner, iMountainbike
Harold Preston hails from Johannesburg, South Africa, a skate boarder who discovered mountain bikes when he made his home in San Diego, California, in 2000. Preston is an all-mountain crusher, a well-respected rider among the area's gravity community, and a mentor to a number of youths who have done well in national and international competition.
MENTIONS: @foxracingshox, @DVOSuspension, @SramMedia, @wilderness-trail-bikes, @iMountainBike


199 Comments

  • + 210
 "had I known that the Mixer's head angle was 67.5 degrees before I began riding it, I may have held back or at least reconsidered some of the technical lines I descended during testing."- do people honestly gauge what trails they can and can't ride based on their head angle?
  • - 107
flag rickaybobbay (Jan 18, 2016 at 0:43) (Below Threshold)
 Yes. HA SEVERELY effects how the bike handles. I hate riding XC bikes because they feel super twitchy ever since I got on a 65° HA. It also effects wheel base (usually) which effects hoe it turns, and if it's steady at speed. I wouldn't want to ride technical, or fast, or steep trail with a almost 68° HA with a 29 front wheel.
  • + 68
 Im aware of what difference head angle makes. my point was that ive never approached riding obstacles differently based on what head angle my bike has. It seemed like a strange comment to me.
  • + 49
 eeeerm bigger wheel has more innertia so it provides more stability than smaller wheel... get your grip strength and keep that wheel pointing where you want it to go. XCers judge bikes on weight, DHillers on head angle -you're all stupid! Big Grin
  • + 56
 Wasnt trying to start a wheelsize debate, just more of a point that some of the trends nobody even knew about 2/3 years ago, we now rely on, otherwise a bike is completely unrideable, "i cant hit that drop, my ETT is only 600 and my reach does not conform with modern trends!"
  • + 10
 I totaly agree with you bluumax. Kids these days... by the time I it my first 20ft jump I had a XC hardtail with 145mm Manitou Nixon fork and V-brake in the rear. So are you kids and enlightened wise men getting that Geometron or what?! I don't see Chris Porter on first page of Forbes after gigantic increase of sales. Everyone here wants a gearbox - Pinion or Zerode aren't breaking the NASDAQ listings, really
  • + 10
 I hear you @bluumax, I'm just glad he didn't read the geo chart first. At least RC let the bike show him what it can do without any preconceived notions of its abilities by reading a piece of paper. It's ok for us at home to use a geo chart, we can't test ride every bike but reviewers should always ride it first I reckon.
  • + 10
 Imagine going for a demo day. You study geocharts and then set out with a group of people. You approach a steep shute and suddenly get off the bike - all those uninformed people who don't have any respect for bicycle technology ride down while you walk down saying: not on a sub 1200 wheelbase! Bike will handle poorly! @ThomDawson - I am not going down this shute, I haven't ridden enough on hardtail this winter Wink
  • + 7
 @ThomDawson Yes definitely, like i said, the comment struck me as odd, wasn't a knock against the review at all. Seems like people will write a bike off nowadays just from looking at the geo chart.
  • + 7
 i agree with you.. the comment was odd.
  • + 1
 "um... my bike is broke... but i'm not gonna go ride my buddies with you guys because his HA is just WAAAYYY to steep!"
  • + 11
 Just to redeem the first commenter, there's plenty of us nerd out there judging the bikes on geo before they ride them. I am guilty as well! It's still funny Big Grin
  • + 1
 Lol, yeah I'm guilty of it too but often the geometry table is all I've got to go on. I was actually going to demo a bike at the weekend for but that got cancelled (Mega at Llandegla) so I'm pretty much stuck with the geometry chart - which looks immense :-P
  • + 2
 given how hard it is to get hold of demo bikes in the right size geo charts are almost compulsory reading........but I never though I'm not hitting that because the head angle is a bit steep!
  • - 6
flag markbe (Jan 18, 2016 at 4:08) (Below Threshold)
 all seems a bit reminiscent to the dh bikes back in 2005? 26 inch front and 24 inch rear wheel! that never lasted as i dare say this may be the same? means you gotta carry twice the kit in case of punctures? tires being ripped? its all good on paper but in the really real world may not be such a good thing especially as xc guys do try to carry as little as possible?
  • + 2
 I fit 26" tubes into 275 wheels and vice versa with great success. I actually bought a big pack of 26" tubes for my 650B bike because they were 2€ cheaper, each Big Grin Should be possible between 275 and 29 with no problems.
  • + 4
 When I was first starting out riding, I didn't know the first thing about geo. I just knew my bike couldn't handle steep roll outs to flat very well so if something looked sketchy I just went into it carefully, prepared to have to bail if I went over the bars. You have to ride some pretty knarly stuff before geo starts to make something unrideable. It may make you ride carefully and more controlled instead of just ploughing through but that's all.
  • + 23
 I'm thinking knarly is a gnarlier word than gnarly. Knice.
  • + 3
 I just carry 27.5 tubes now. They fit all 3 MTB wheel sizes if your tubeless setup fails
  • - 7
flag markbe (Jan 18, 2016 at 9:47) (Below Threshold)
 oh i see and do 26 inch tires just stretch over the different rim sizes? everyone skipped around that one eh? its funny how people will get all testy over something that to me looks like a massive pain in the ass if anybody was planning long rides!
  • + 5
 I carry nothing but a pocket full of flapjack. That's all you really real need \o/ kflapjack
  • + 2
 This could be the hack of the century...err... it works right...? Cos I'm packing a 29 & 27.5.
  • + 16
 Markbe - if you screw up a 26" tyre you still have to buy a new 26" tyre which costs as much and takes as much to ship as it's 275 and 29" counterparts. i just checked it for you: it takes 12,3 seconds more to order a set of Nobby Nic 275 and 29 than just clickin the BUY button twice on one Nobby Nic 275. 12,3 sec is a difference between 1st and 46th place on this years Val Di Sole DH World cup.
  • + 1
 Most people don't ride the same tread pattern for front and rear so it shouldn't really matter if u have Diffrent sizes ether.
  • + 1
 @but then you have different types of trails and different types of weather. I ride a more grippy tyre up front and a faster rolling tyre in the back. For loose / wet conditions I ride a Minion SinglePly up front and a wide Racing Ralph in the back. Where as for hardpack dirt I want to put that rear tyre to the front and mount a Thunder Burt in the back for less rolling resistance. Meaning I switch around with tyres, depending on trail/weather condition. With this bike I would not be able to do that and I would have to buy more tyres.

Also when going away for cycling holidays / weekends I prefer to bring a spare tyre and a spare rim. With this bike you'll have to buy twice as much tyres and twice as much rims for spares, and carry around double as much.

As for the riding, making the head angle one degree slacker would create the same amount of trail on the front wheel as you have with a 29" front wheel, making the 29" a not effective upgrade for handling (not outweighing the downsides in my opinion).

Also for less rolling resistance and more rolling inertia: since your weight is mainly above your rear wheel, only changing the front wheel is not very effective. When Bikeradar did a test between wheel sizes, 29" was 1% faster around their xc trail than 26". Meaning that since this is only the front wheel, or would roughly only be 0.3% faster. Not worth having two different wheel sizes for in my opinion. If rolling resistance and inertia are really that important to you, it is 3 times as effective to go full 29", compared to front wheel only.
  • + 0
 Enlighten me....i have an intense tracer 2 with works angleset 1.5 degree(or maybe 1 degree..not sure) and a 180mm fork. The frame is set to its longer travel setting. What HA do i have now?...thanks
  • + 8
 Simply an anecdotal reference to how easy it is to pre-judge a bike's performance by its numbers. In this case, the bike descended near vertical drops and chunky steeps as if it was far slacker up front.
  • + 2
 My dropper post compensates for steeper HAs.
  • + 5
 Isn't 67.5 very slack for a 29? Same as the specialized enduro and evil the following. I don't know of a slacker 29. Seems strange to describe it as steep.
  • + 3
 New Mega 290 is 66° and there are a couple more. Although 67.5° has been a popular number for slacker 29ers the consensus seems to be that they can go slacker still if it's an aggressive bike.
  • + 1
 Just to add while I wait for the kettle, while I found slacker angles great for adding confidence, going back to a steeper one I didn't really feel less confident - I just didn't like how the bike handled and steered, preferring the slacker one. Should head angle be used to provide confidence or to tweak handling to your preference? Or both? Down sizing your bike will be cool again this summer, maybe super slack bikes will become passé too?
  • + 1
 Um, yes...? A 27.5 tube will work in a 26 tire, at least enough to finish the ride until you fix your tubeless set up. Schwalbe actually makes tubes that are labeled 27.5, 28 & 29 on the same box (amazon.com/dp/B000NIWG).
They will work in a 26 too, from 3 trailside experiences I've seen...
  • + 2
 @AlexS1 oops, that one didn't work, try this link instead www.amazon.com/dp/B000NIWGD8
  • + 2
 Hey jlhenterprises, thanks for the link! Saves a lot of weight since I switch bike every now and then.
  • + 106
 The Rise of the Mullet Bike has begun! Business at the front and party at the back
  • + 9
 Spark24. Thanks. Monday morning on pinkbike. Go funny or go home.
  • + 2
 That is now their name. "mullet bike" is way better than "mixer"!
Thanks Spark24
  • + 2
 Free Rando!
  • + 2
 This makes me wonder about putting a 650B on the back of my honzo and seeing how that goes. Mullet on...
  • + 65
 Pick two wheel sizes be a massive dick about it
  • + 48
 I ride 26 up front/ 29 rear going uphill, then flip them round 29front 26 rear to come back down.
I'm always level.
  • + 1
 Innovation of the year!!
  • + 17
 Do not buy a bike from this company, horrible customer service...cracks all over the bike not 6 months into owning fxr...Took them 9 months to warranty and all they did was weld it...Didnt even fix all of the cracks...Wanted to buy American but this company sucks...Cant even return a phone call...Buyers beware...
  • + 18
 @RichardCunningham How exactly does a bike 'corner like a centrifuge'?
  • + 20
 Gets stuck in circles?
  • + 3
 I loved that 'corners like a centrifuge' comment, it totally contradicts itself haha!!
  • + 10
 Centrifuges are always cornering,endlessly.. maybe he means once you're in, you can't pull out... and end up in an infinite loop
  • + 14
 Once I'm in, I always find it impossible to pull out.
  • + 2
 a reference to pulling G
  • + 1
 Thanks G!
  • + 1
 @Scribbler

A corner is where two edges meet... Centrifuges run in a constant circle. A circle has no corners!

It amused me because (if you take the two words by their technical meaning) it literally doesn't make sense, but figuratively is easy to understand what RC means.
  • + 4
 In my experience, as someone who works on lab equipment, centifuges are generally f*ckin heavy.... perhaps that's what he means?
  • + 9
 I made my Enduro 29 a "mullet" bike. I'm really loving the 27.5 in the rear for more aggressive , gravity orientated riding. It absolutely rips berms and the slacker HA is great for the steeps.
  • + 7
 Mountain bike design has been copying off road motorcycle design for years, things moving in this direction may make some sense. That said I ran my Bronson with a 26" rear wheel for a bit (not through choice), can't say I noticed any difference.
  • + 9
 Mountain biking today is relearning exactly the same things that motocross learned 45 years ago, in the 70's.
  • + 6
 Is it possible that 29" front and 26 Plus in the rear is the future? Richard, why would you measure handlebar height from the ground instead of BB? I advocate for establishing the "definite reach, stack and spread", bicycle measuring standard where we determine the 3-dimensional location of the grips in relation to bottom bracket and steerer axis.
  • + 7
 Some Spec Enduro owners like the 29/27 set up....

Its pointless measuring from the ground....stack heights are already too low on larger frames...this sort of article doesn't help general understanding
  • + 2
 I read about that dimension with no mention of BB height/drop/stack, in 2 different bike magazines when they were testing XC racing bikes, hence I am a bit curious if I have missed something in studying geo-centric religions
  • + 3
 Totally. Top tube length measurements are pretty meaningless compared to reach numbers
  • + 4
 @WAKIdesigns You may want to check out this (German) short review of the Last Fastforward Hardtail. They tried 3 combinations, including 29" front / 26+ rear. Verdict: It depends.

www.mtb-news.de/news/2015/11/05/last-fastforward-test
  • + 2
 Bigger tires, more grip on the back wheel? No more drifting? Damn, that would be a shame, wouldn't it?
  • + 2
 @WAKIdesigns According to this pinkbike article from 2008, this should already be the norm.

www.pinkbike.com/news/08ReachStackStandard.html
  • + 0
 bmxsnox - frame reach and stack applies to dimension from center of the top of the headtube to BB. I talk about grips. I speak hypothetically since that is a very confusing and misleading issue. Half of the stem length debates are meaningless since handlebar geometry can be so varied between different models. I guess an interesting measure would be one from end of the grip to the end of the crankset axle.
  • + 0
 I see what you are saying @WAKIdesigns. However, I think we have to limit our comparisons to fixed points. A person can alter the distance from their grips to crank axle, but they can't change the reach and stack.
  • - 1
 But bikes do come with parts mounted to it Smile In the same way BB drop dimension is relatively meaningless for how the bike handles, despite being definite. It's about BB to tyre patches and overall center of mass of the bike/rider combo
  • + 9
 Waki, The BB heights of the two bikes are within a centimeter, so measuring from the ground was all I needed for a quick check. The best comment in this thread, however, is your mention that arguing about stem lengths (assuming we are comparing stems from 70 to 35mm) is useless without first considering the sweep-back angles of the handlebar. I have been measuring a number of combinations for a future article, and grip position in relation to the steerer centerline is a more important number than stem length.
  • + 1
 Maybe I'm the odd one out here, but the first thing I do when I get a new bike is change the bars, stem, seat, and pedals. All my bikes run the same handlebars, so this is a constant for me. Therefore, the only thing that changes bike to bike is stem length and rise.
  • + 2
 depends how odd is your cockpit
  • + 2
 I've taken to referring to this as "effective stem length". I've noticed that once you figure in the back sweep of a typical bar a 30mm stem tends to give you an effective stem length of about 10mm - which is suspect is why Mondraker increased from zero stems as they'd have been negative effective length.

I'm running 50mm stems on both my bikes, the full-sus with a 20mm rise 800mm bar, the hardtail with a 40mm rise 750mm bar. The 750s have more backsweep plus I have them tilted back which reduces the rise and shortens the effective stem length further, so despite both bikes being on nominally 50mm stems one feels ~20mm shorter than the other.
  • + 3
 The problem with riser bars is that the numbers from product description are completely arbitrary and relatively meaningless. I spoke to a guy who's launching a production of carbon handlebars quite soon and he wanted to get a slightly modded Renthal with more up sweep. When the time came to give the numbers for the sales sheet he started scratching his head. He took a number of bars tried measuring them in all possible ways and nothing matched the product description but width and clamp diameter. Bars from different companies having same numbers (good old dead beat 8back 5up) were having their ends in different locations for a given width. And differences for grip location on various bars and stem combos can be quite staggering. My old Kore flat bar just like Easton Haven were putting grips over an inch further back than Answer Pro Taper and 1,5" further back than Renthals! So all those short stem zealots are way out in Noclueland since Renthals with 35 stem put grips in almost same location as Havens with 60 stem. Add the factor of handlebar rise and possibility of rotating them in the stem and put it against claims that going from 50 to 45 stem made so much difference. Bollocks. Everyone has to try a number of bar/stem combinations for a longer period of time or GAEEET OUT with your claims of what is "progressive"! Big Grin
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns that's really interesting....I always assumed there is variation in all measurements but never on that kind of scale and certainly not on bars.
  • + 9
 2 different wheel sizes on one bike, now this is crazy, and I like it and I want to try it.
  • + 5
 "Studies done by Liteville's Jo Klieber indicate that nearly all of the terrain-leveling action that is attributed to a 29er's superior rolling efficiency is generated at the front wheel."
That's a bold statement that is certainly true in some conditions, eg riding downhill. Whereas riding uphill would bias your weight towards the rear wheel quite a lot unless you have a very steep seat angle. In that case your rear wheel will just hook up on any root. Now I'd be curious to ride this bike, like I'm curious to try any bike anyway. Numbers are not always meaningful.
  • + 7
 I'm not aware of many 29ers that are slacker than that, and I really thought it was all about trail anyways (so a 29er at 67.5 is equivalent to a 27.5 at 65).
  • + 4
 I was thinkjng the same. 67.5 is decently slack for a 29er
  • + 2
 Trail makes up for about one degree of HA. 67.5 29er = 66.5 275.
  • - 5
flag hamncheez (Jan 18, 2016 at 7:15) (Below Threshold)
 Trail is only part of the picture. I went from a 65 degree 26" to my enduro 29er at 67.5, and it feels like I'm riding an XC bike. 67.5 is NOT slack enough for a 160mm fork, maybe for a 140mm fork if its not meant to be ridden hard.
  • + 2
 Was thinking the same thing- enduro 29er also is a 67.5 HA. The only FS 29ers I can think of off the top of my head that are slacker than that are the Following and the Riot.
  • + 4
 The WFO is slacker at 66.5 I would personally like to set mine at 66 and then try going even slacker and experiment, however Specialized, in all their wisdom, uses integrated proprietary headset hardware so no angleset.
  • + 5
 I agree. My Enduro 29 is around 67' and I have zero issues riding it down the steepest trails of Southern BC. A 6" fork on a 29er with a 67' head angle is plenty.
  • + 8
 so your "well-respected" all mountain crusher only threw a leg over a mountain bike last year ??
  • + 3
 Who cares? He's just the guy in the pictures.
  • + 3
 I'm coaching a guy at the moment who's been riding 8 months and puts people who have been riding 8 years to shame. It really doesn't and shouldn't matter who's reporting on this as long as the talent and willingness is there. Coming from a skateboarding background you can pretty much guarantee he will know how to adjust his weight and body position accordingly to keep the wheels on and off the ground
  • + 1
 it's in the content not the cover
  • + 1
 If you ride alot you can get good pretty fast. My riding buddy started mtbing in 2015 and by the end of the season he was doing black diamond bikepark laps and is one of the faster riders in my area now.
  • + 2
 Not sure why it says 2015, Harry has been involved with mountain bikes for at lest a couple years prior to that
  • + 2
 I saw that, only been at it for a year haha.
  • + 1
 @sewer-rat: There's nothing wrong with being a noob to the sport but it's kind of amazing that the world's largest mtb website would be posting an in-depth review from a guy who just started. I just started playing guitar a year ago. Trust me, my review of a guitar does not belong anywhere but in my own head. I only know enough now to know I don't know shit.
  • + 1
 @WestwardHo true, it's quite weird I grant it. However I doubt the worlds largest MTB site wouldn't ask him for content if they believed his points were invalid or inexperienced. Truth is we just don't know how much he's rode in that period of time and just have to accept his critiques
  • + 3
 Look up the top, the review is by Richard Cunningham.
  • + 5
 Harry Preston has also been test riding the bikes I review for a number of years. In most cases, after I ride a test bike, I hand it off to one or more riders for additional feedback. Harry also looks a lot better on a bike than I do, so I often use him for photo shoots.
  • + 7
 I literally pedaled the bike for 20
Minutes, shooting for 2 hours. It felt great and cornered like no other, at the end of the shoot, the rear tire has 18 psi, result squirrelly.
I'm RC stunt man. I believe this will have been my 11 bike review that I've been involved in for the world largest mountain bike website Wink
Cheers, Harry
  • + 4
 I've had a Ventana made for this type of configuration for 3 years now...160mm travel, 67 hta...ridiculously fun! The cornering thing is absolutely true, and I feel zero compromise for downhill stability or rollover. I only carry 26 tubes for backup...works fine on 29 and 27.5.

Course, I am also getting a custom Waltworks 29+ 160mm full suspension bike built up (with room for up to 26 x 4.5 rear), so my tastes may be considered eclectic....
  • + 4
 " I called Vigilante tires "High Plains Drifters" because when pushed to their limits on sunbaked trails, they would lose grip with little warning. Moisture in the soil, however, brought their fangs out. Once the tread could penetrate the trail surface, the grip and control they offered were significantly better than that original experience. "

This sums up why every MBA tire review has been completely useless to anyone outside SoCal...
  • + 3
 I seem to remember a positive MBA review of the Vigilante about a year ago. Confusing. Personally, i think its a nice all around tire.
  • + 4
 I haven't a problem with a B-Niner setup, its better than a 69er setup. But if they're going to the trouble to boost the back end, they could have plus sized the tire clearance also.
  • + 1
 @deeeight I agree. With all of the shanannigans around standards (wheel diameter, tire size, hub width, etc) , bike manufacturers will be better served if they can make small adjustments to give consumers choices down the road. Building frame that can run 29er, 27.5 plus, and 27.5 greatly reduces the debate.
  • + 1
 Well its more to do with the whole "how will it feel". A 650B 2.8 tire is still smaller diameter than 700C 2.3 tire. so it would still behave similar to how they've got it now but you'd have a lot more traction/grip in back with half an inch more tread width on the ground, as well as the greater air cushion from the larger tire volume. If you look at MX bikes... they run a narrow larger diameter front tire/wheel with a fatter/smaller diameter rear that in terms to front to rear overall diameter is very close, but still not quite identical.
  • + 0
 @deeeight - when talkign about Boost, I had an stupid, truly idiotic idea lately... assuming that Boost was made mostly for PLUS tyres, to minimize the chance of chain rubbing on the rear tyre, when using granny ring (front is an obvious benefit), why couldn't we just offset the whole rear hub 3mm to the drive side, leaving the rim where it was? - wheel stiffness would increase since spoke triangulation would get better. Mhm...

@ryan83 - As you say, the 275+ makes an exotic 29er and the funny bit a bout it is that Giant swore that 650B is so damn good that 29ers will be phased out just like 26ers... and now they have to say how well it rolls and the additional weight is worth it. I love it when the world burns for someone...
  • + 3
 So how long until the big boys copy this sled and everyone starts to believe it's the new must-have geo design - 2 years? Isn't that pretty much the history of Foes in a nutshell?
  • + 6
 This is the future for downhill. Just wait
  • + 2
 Foes back in the day was a desired machine and a fair cost compared to similar handcrafted bikes of the time, but now, to me these guys are very dated and still running geo from that era almost, yeah the mixed wheel config I can see has benefits but to most that didference is so small they would hardly notice.

They would benefit more from an aggressive 2.4 front tire and a fast rolling 2.25 in the rear, to buy that frame here is 5.2k NZD, for $1500 more I can buy a complete carbon Canyon pro or many other bikes complete with a near top specc, really nothing new or ground breaking for the cost ratio to me, smaller coy imo need to be more fluid and dynamic if still asking for a price due to hand crafted in the USA. times they have a changed, thats all Im a saying here.
  • + 2
 Hey guys/gals,

I ride a Foes Enduro Mixer in beautiful green and have been on her all summer and into the winter. I have ridden 45 mile flat land rides and rippin "Pipeline" runs all the trails here in the Springs and will be taking her into roadie world in Leadville 100 later this summer. I have bought about 7 bikes from Mike V at Timberline Cycles and yes am a bit biased towards his mad scientistism if you will but reap the benefits of it all. I have tried to read all 177 comments but if I had a couple one liners I would say RIDE THIS BIKE and comment away. Yes the Trail has some clearance issues but the Mixer wheel combination of 29/27.5 is a virtual sweet spot. I rode the Trail on a 50 mile ride and had a blast but opted for my Enduro which has perfect clearance and is a lethal trail weapon as Mike says. I have also put Surly Dirt Wizard 3.0s in the front and a WTB Trailblazer 2.8 in the back for austere conditions with no clearance problems. I honestly think the sweet spot is 40mm rims stretching out the tire of your choice(Schwalbe Muddy Mary 2.35 up front/Maxxis Minion 2.35 rear). This stretches the tire to almost 2.6 and is all you really need. I use Strava to clock times but that is the extent of it and have had 17 personal records here aboard the Trail and Enduro models. In closing I will tell you that head tube angle can be altered and Mike does it here with offset preferences for each rider. Enjoy the Mixer wheel revolution my friends!!
  • + 1
 As the owner of a bike with two different wheel sizes, I have to say that I really liked the idea when the bike was new (less flexible/bendable rear rim, better descent geometry, easier to manual, good rolling resistance, higher agility), but as I've owned the bike, and the novelty has worn off, I begin to wonder about things like: carrying two spare tube sizes, not being able to find matching tires, having to buy two different replacement rims instead of one, and how much the minor difference actually affects the bike, or if it's mostly just a mental thing.
  • + 6
 Well, one of your issues is not an issue at all- a 26er, or 27.5 tube works fine as an emergency replacement for a 29er. Maybe not 100% optimal, but certainly good enough to get you home.
  • + 1
 Yeah, there's seemingly more upsides than downsides to mismatched wheels for somebody like me.
  • + 1
 I can't even recall the last time I had matching tires front and rear on my bike. They spec a lot of new bikes with different tires front and rear these days, so nothing to worry about there. If you break one rim, I would imagine you would buy one rim or one wheel, not a whole wheelset, regardless of the size. That said, if you have a less common wheelset and couldn't find the same rim in the other size that would certainly bother me. I'm sure part of the reason the Stans Flow is specced on this bike is because it is so ubiquitous in both sizes. If you need a whole new wheelset I imagine that may be slightly more challenging for some folks but as the reviewer mentions in the article, many wheelsets are sold as individuals.
  • + 1
 It's not like you have to buy two tires at a time. It's not they don't sell rims seperatly. Heck a LOT of the time you don't even get a deal for buying two rims/wheels at the same time. It's just the more expensive rear and the less expensive front added up...? So hardly anything different than what your doing now
  • + 2
 If you think of this as a 29er with short chainstays and less rotational weight on the drive wheel it makes SO MUCH SENSE. Otherwise it sounds like a 650b bike with an awkwardly tall front end, and a longer turning radius.
  • + 2
 Soooo, did that personal best down that particular trail happen to be one that was rebuilt after out last heavy rain because I can see some freshly groomed trails and I know where this is lol.
  • + 2
 Nope, different line completely, but some of the trails we did the photo shoot on were almost first tracks on perfectly re-shaped berms and jumps. Thanks Andy.
  • + 1
 Nice! Thanks for the reply RC! Hope to bump into you sometime out on the trails.
  • + 2
 6,000 for a non carbon bike is expensive. surprised on how nobody mentioned it. considering you can get something like a carbon mach 6 with fox and xt for around the same price.
  • + 1
 That was my 2nd thought, my first thought was 6000 bicks for a nearly 31lb MEDIUM bike??? That's not cool at all...
  • + 1
 You can buy them from timberline cycles as tested for $4000. Call Mike up at Timberline in Colorado Springs, Colordo.
  • + 1
 4g's is a fair price...
  • + 3
 Not bashing Foes, but people have been building 96ers for a long time. Yes not production, but it is very far from a new concept.
  • + 4
 Yeah but this is a 97.5er so it's completely new and different
  • + 2
 And 24/26 and 26/29 sucked.
  • + 3
 You men 9-65ers?

27.5 is wrong, 650b is right, you know?
  • + 1
 I want to try this bike and it is on the list of things to consider in the next year or so. I am 6'4" and need 29s not to feel like a circus bear riding a tricycle. The problem is all of these reviews, two or three in total, are all pretty much in the SW and California which means absolutely zero to someone living, well, anywhere else.

How was the pedaling platform? What happened if you hammered out of saddle (something single pivots suffer from at times)?
  • + 3
 This is why ive been running 650b front and 26 rear wheel on my custom built "shore bike" a Gt distortion. 2 years on it and I have no plans to change anything...
  • + 4
 Looks like it needs a Syntace Flatforce stem: www.syntace.com/index.cfm?pid=3&pk=2629
  • + 1
 Nice, or just run the other stem upside down?
  • + 1
 Can't help but think that aside from the different wheel size idea that Foes are just behind the times. Good to see at last they have ditched the awful Curnutt shocks though. (I've owned a couple foes with the Curnutt)

Otherwise it just looks like any other single pivot (linked) bike of the moment.
  • + 1
 Had the same experience with Curnutt, shock rebounded very slowly and didn't pop off jumps well at all, I suddenly couldn't clear any of the jumps at my local trails, plus it hooked up like crazy over braking bumps too, never rode a bike that's been slowed up so much by rough terrain, it was a foes fly, looked great but was slow as hell
  • + 1
 Mine was on a Foes DHS Mono (2005). I had it serviced by the UK agent of the time (Balfa UK) and it felt worse! It was so firm and had so much stiction or resistance at the start of the stroke it was horrid. It was decent on the big hits but that was about it.

Got rid of it all in the end in favour of something a bit more modern.
  • + 2
 I had a bike with two different sized tires once. A 3.0 Gazza (ie: plus bike) with a 2.3 rear... Didn't specialized do this to their bighit in 2002? Didn't it suck?
  • + 2
 Totally different execution though- the Bighit had a ginormous rear tire so the outside diameter was close to the same as the frunt.
  • + 3
 Great word... ginormous
  • + 10
 ginormous should only be used for describing boobs and genitals.
  • + 2
 We are more liberal on this side of the pond.... ;-)
  • + 4
 Thats the choicest dirt I have seen in San Diego in years.
  • + 1
 I was out this weekend, and while it was still pretty awesome, it's already starting to dry up! Get out while you can.
  • + 1
 Is there research done on this Mixer discipline? How detailed and how far research go to justify that this Mixer is functional and ergonomically feasible? Is this just a Fad?
  • + 1
 i stop reading at 30.8 pounds with an estimated MSRP of $6,000 USD
i'm not a weight weenie but i prefer a carbon bike at this price. A carbon bike 3 pounds lighter with be easier to climb and more agile will descending.
  • + 3
 Typically you only gain 1.5-2.0 lbs on alloy for an all-mountain bike. As far as easier to climb and agile while descending I'd argue that tires, suspension and wheels will have a much greater affect on performance than frame material.
  • + 3
 I also thought $6k was a little steep for a 30+lbs bike. Not that I'm a weight weenie, but that's kinda pushing the limits of good taste. I mean, I'm pretty sure my bike is that heavy - but I literally spent $4+k less. Anyhow. The downvote button is the red one, have at it.
  • + 1
 I got my mixer trail from timberline cycles in Colorado for $4000 with this same build in the review.
  • + 3
 I'd definitely be interested in a 27.5/26 Mixer. Even at 6'3" I feel that a 29 inch wheeled bike is too tall.
  • + 1
 I'm 6'1" and ride a large trail version of the mixer, it's a ripper, and I came from a 26" bike. You can tell the difference in sped and pure fun!
  • + 1
 I put 29 wheel (160mm pike 29 fork) on 2015 banshee rune xl (27,5 back). Cornering was "ok" (maybe a 800mm bar would help more instead of 780) but more straight lines...ooohh maaan!!!! Better than on a dh bikeSmile )
  • + 1
 Cunningham, why the hate for SRAM GX in your reviews? Everyone else seems to be stocked on the money savings to be spent elsewhere like wheels that actually have a benefit for the extra cost.
  • + 0
 Interesting bike and article.

Personally I wouldnt run two different wheelsizes, because it makes it harder to have different tyre sets (for different weather). It really limits your options which tyres to combine (which you already own), aswell for spare parts it sucks. For cycling holidays / weekends I prefer to bring one spare tyre and one spare rim. With this bike neither will be enough and you have to buy and carry around twice as much spare parts. Same goes for tubes. You can fit different sizes of tubes in different wheelsizes, but it won't last as long since it will either get stretched more than it's designed to, or have a fold in it.

As for the high front end, you seem to have a 20-25mm rise bar there, the stem seems to have a bit of rise and I see some spacers underneath the stem. Buying 0mm rise flat bars, taking out the spacers underneath, and mounting the stem upside down so it has negative rise should lower your bars about 40mm, which is quite a lot.

A while ago Bikeradar did a test of 29" vs 27.5" and 26". The result was that 29" wheels made you about 1% faster on their xc trail. But since most of your weight is on your rear wheel, it means most rolling resistance and most rolling intertia are on the rear wheel (guessing around 2/3). So switching the front wheel doesn't really seem to be effective, except for probably a safer feeling on rough descents, where a smaller wheel with a slacker head angle would have the same effect.

Since 29ers have a bigger trail, they need a less slack head angle to get the same feeling. Usually you see companies deduct 1 degree head angle per wheel size, on similar bikes. So a 67.5 degree HA on a 29er (front wheel in this case) feels similar to a 66.5 degree HA on 27.5", which feels similar to a 65.5 degree HA on 26". Which explains why 29ers have steeper head angles.

Personally I feel like it would have been better to slacken the HA by one degree and fit a 27.5" front wheel, for the same effect. It would be more practical for the owner of the bike.
  • + 1
 A friend of mine has been riding a zerode and a Following mb for a while and he loves it. I’m in the process of outing a 29” fork / wheel on a calling
  • + 1
 I owned a Cannondale hardtail with a 26" front and 24" rear. It ripped! And no lie it was Pink. Yup back in the late 80's I owned a Pinkbike.
  • + 2
 One of the main advantages to the 27.5 in the rear are the shorter chainstays.
  • + 1
 What about swapping out the 29er front to a 27.5+ fork and tyre. Sounds like that would be a bit of fun. More traction and similar roll over.
  • + 3
 This bike is just not foes me Wink
  • + 1
 Foes should have waited a few more weeks so that the bike was released the same time as the new Star Wars movie and called it the Trail Trooper.
  • + 2
 We'll soon se some 27.5"+ in the back and a 29er up front...the fun is all that matters for us.
  • + 2
 ...and it'll work great for hardtails keeping them simple and the stings away.
  • + 2
 Oh ffs hope this doesn't trend. We'll all be riding penny-farthings next season
  • + 1
 29'er/20. Everything old is new again.
  • + 2
 Well just about every dirt bike I have ever ridden has a larger wheel in front. Moto has been doing it for decades.
  • - 1
 It looks like a pretty nice bike, I like the rear end quite a bit, and their decision to only offer a single front ring. My friend recently bought a bike, he converted it to a single front ring because he felt like he didn't need all of the low speed ratios, and I agree.
  • + 2
 I wonder what would happen if you un-welded the tires from the frame, and put 26's or 27's on it?
  • + 1
 this is kinda the perfect bike for those who don't want to make the switch away from there 26" like my self. were's the Curnutt?
  • + 1
 So can I stick a 29er front end on any bike and call it a "mixer", or does this bike have "mixer" specific geometry?
  • + 2
 Been waiting for one of these to arise. I love foes
  • + 1
 Foes website is down, wonder if their Mixer was drew enough interest that they blew through their bandwidth?
  • + 2
 She looks and sounds like a great bike!
  • + 1
 They thought they could dissimulate the heavy weight of this frame by surprising people with asymmetric wheels. It worked.
  • + 2
 Sweet bike. I wonder whether my husband will let me get one
  • + 1
 Just be sweet to him.
  • + 5
 Kick him in the balls until he does...
  • + 1
 Ditch the husbo and marry me. I'll let you have it
  • + 1
 @Satn69 I think thats a dood... But to each his own.
  • + 2
 Let me know when we're back on 26! Maybe then I'll buy another bike.
  • + 3
 26'' for life anyway!
  • + 1
 Didn't Gary Fisher do the double wheel size 29 front 26 rear in the early 00's? then there was the specialized Big Hit
  • + 1
 Dirt magazine ran a test using an Enduro 29er Wich yielded better results.
  • + 1
 How would you compare this to the Kona Process 111?
  • + 3
 You wouldn't.
  • + 1
 Forgot to mention the zerode and Following have 29”/ 27.5
  • + 1
 I must say I do like how long stroke shocks look on bikes...
  • + 1
 I had the FOES shaver trail few years back real bad case of rear end flex
  • - 1
 Thank you Foes for another hideous looking, outdated, overweight and overpriced dinosaur.
  • + 1
 Bro - I might agree on the design, but not on the other aspects. Price is on par for a domestically manufactured frame, Foes obviously targets buyers who care about that and have the coin to support it. I think the bike looks dope. And weight is on par for an aluminum mid-travel aggressive trail bike.

Speaking of design, remember the Santa Cruz Butcher? Similar design with good reviews to my recollection, but SC pulled it out of production. I'm guessing it was cannibalizing sales of their more boutique Nomad. Anyway, this isn't 'affordable' like the Butcher was.
  • + 1
 Looks like a Nomad.
  • + 1
 game changing hopefully
  • - 2
 Rear wheel clearance!!!
  • + 9
 Yeah, but can you bothered be reading the text first?
  • + 0
 For those who need it spelled out........don't buy until they have modified and you have actually seen the new clearance!
  • + 1
 Well then will the the chain stays get longer? leading to less centrifugy handling.
  • - 3
 Since it's only half 29er, does that mean it's only half gay?
  • - 4
flag wikenrider (Jan 18, 2016 at 0:21) (Below Threshold)
 or half macho?
  • - 2
 No, its just "conflicted" .
  • - 5
flag Sontator (Jan 18, 2016 at 1:19) (Below Threshold)
 Half caterpillar, half butterfly.
  • - 4
flag Sontator (Jan 18, 2016 at 1:21) (Below Threshold)
 Conflicted half macho half gay... means it can f*** itself!? XD (ducks and runs)
  • + 8
 When did bikes signify sexual preference?
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.137786
Mobile Version of Website