timdpeterson

Warning- Old Man 27.5 rant approaching, lol. I currently have a 27.5 150mm 36 Grip2 on my trail bike, and 27.5 170mm 38 Grip2 on my bigger bike (Banshee Spitfire and Revel Rail, respectively), both about circa 2021. Super bummed to see that the only new 27.5 36 option is for a 160mm GripX. Being a 200lb rider I really like the set-it-and-forget-it adjustability of the GripX (now X2). I can run a 140-160 fork on my Banshee, I've tried all three but the ideal setting is 150. Do you think the airspring on the 160 GripX could be swapped out for a 150, and then the damper swapped out for the X2?? Happy to see that the 170mm 38 GripX2 is still an option. In general I'm annoyed by the industry push towards 29ers, and it seems to be based in saving $$ with fewer options. I've been riding long enough to have watched every trend over the past 40 years, and an aspect that gets overlooked with 29ers is the added power required to turn a bigger wheel. It made no sense that product managers would spec the exact same gearing on their 27.5 and 29 models, knowing that the 29ers would be harder to climb with the same chainrings as the smaller wheels. Also, FTP power plays a large part here. If a rider has a road background, and crosses over into CX and XC, then 29 makes sense. But for the 90% of punchy riding a MTB encounters, a smaller wheel makes more sense, regardless of rider height. This is where mullets help, but if you aren't charging steep chunky stuff it becomes overkill, and ends up being cumbersome in tight twisty sections. I understand your hosts affinity for 29/mullet for DH and park riding, but for general trail riding it's overkill. The fact that Transition now markets their 27.5 line towards children is insulting, lol. Rant over, thanks for the great content!

For the guy asking about moderate geo aluminum trail bikes, I'd also add Banshee to the mix.