Rocky Mountain Pipeline - Sea Otter 2016

Apr 14, 2016 at 22:16
by Vernon Felton  
Sea Otter 2016


Rocky Mountain was one of the first major companies to come out of the gate with a plus-size bike. True, brands like Surly have been sailing these seas for years. For some reason, when Rocky debuted that bike — the Sherpa — at Sea Otter two years ago, people took notice.


Rocky Mountain Pipeline

The proto-Sherpa may have seemed like some kind of flipper-headed, six-toed oddity back in 2014, but Sea Otter 2016 is a whole different scene. This joint is packed today with plus-size models. Some models look well thought out. Others appear to be the result of a couple of desperate meetings between the marketing team and an engineer who was having a really bad day.

Evolution can be a mofo like that.

Given the mad rush to build bikes with extra-fat tires, we thought we’d go full circle and talk to Rocky Mountain’s resident marketing guy-slash-international male model, Andreas Hestler, about their new Pipeline. We already wrote a thorough piece on what the Pipeline is all about. You can check it out here. Think of this as more of a “Why did you actually make the Pipeline?” story.


Rocky Mountain Pipeline


Vernon Felton: A couple years ago, you guys were one of the only companies at Sea Otter with a plus-size bike, the Sherpa. Now almost everyone has one in their line. What sets the Pipeline apart from those other plus-size bikes and from your last plus-size bike?

Andreas Hestler: The Sherpa was dedicated to bike packing and big adventures. Our product manager looked at it like ‘When the trail ends, I want to go and see what more is out there. What bike would work best here?’ That was really the premise behind the Sherpa.

Now, three years later, everything has evolved, so we’ve evolved a bit too. We wanted to make a trail bike—the kind of plus-size bike better suited to more aggressive riders. So, we adapted our Instinct frame, used the Boost 148 axle standard and made the Pipeline.


Felton: The component market for plus-size bikes has also blown up in the past twelve months. How has that manifested itself on this bike?

Hestler: Yeah, well, now we have options on rims, tires, cranks, forks—we have a lot of options from manufacturers that just didn’t exist when we first made the Sherpa. So you see all of that here on the Pipeline—Boost fork and rear end, BB92 with a Boost crank, new more aggressive tires….


Rocky Mountain Pipeline


Felton: Seemingly small differences in tire sizes make a huge difference in how these plus-size bikes ride. Why’d you go with 2.8's on the Pipeline?

Hestler: We went with the Maxxis Rekon 2.8's—it just suits our riding in B.C., but you can fit up to a 3.25-inch front and rear tire. A 2.8 is what we felt matches best to a plus-size, aggressive trail bike, but if you want to take it out in the snow, or you live somewhere really dry and sandy, the bigger tire might be the better option. We wanted to give people the flexibility to upsize or downsize their tires to match their own conditions. With this frame, you’re not stuck with just one tire size.


Rocky Mountain Pipeline


Felton: So, you adapted the Instinct front triangle into the design of the new Pipeline. The two bikes have that common design DNA. Taking that into account, when do you personally reach for the Instinct and when do you reach for the Pipeline?

Hestler: They’re definitely different. When I reach for a two-niner like the Instinct, I reach for a race weapon—a cross-country racing machine—a scalpel of a bike. Weight considerations—particularly from the rim through to the tire are massively important. I want to go fast in the front country.

When I reach for the Pipeline, I’m going out for fun. Maybe I’m bike-packing, maybe I’m just going on a long all-day Chilcotin expedition. Bottom line, I’m looking for a bike that gives me more room for error on trails that I am riding blind and the plus-size tires on this bike let me keep riding aggressively, but with that extra margin for error in the backcountry.


MENTIONS: @RockyMountainBicycles



Author Info:
vernonfelton avatar

Member since Apr 11, 2014
202 articles

32 Comments
  • 45 0
 not even mad due to the awesome dumbing down the shore video
  • 13 3
 I think I am mostly disappointed that rocky said that the Pipeline can't fit 29er wheels or the tire will hit the seat tube. it woulda been cool to have an Instinct BC edition and a Pipeline rolled in to one. Too bad. That being said, 3.25's seem pretty big.... almost 29er big...
  • 5 0
 Like you said "That being said, 3.25's seem pretty big.... almost 29er big..."
It's wierd, this bike can fit 3.25 but not regular 29 altough there are plus bikes that can fit "only" 3.0 AND 29er.
  • 3 2
 @brutalpedz: Well, outer wheel-diameter vs "side-to-side" tire-diameter... Both might be close for 27,5+ and 29er, but a few mm can make all the difference, I guess.
  • 19 2
 @jts-nemo: Thats what she said!
  • 3 7
flag brutalpedz (Apr 15, 2016 at 5:33) (Below Threshold)
 @jts-nemo: An inflated tire has a circular section, so "side-to-side" is also "top-to-bottom"...
  • 2 0
 Maybe an offset bushing or two would give you what you need?
  • 1 0
 I had the same thought.
  • 1 2
 @brutalpedz: That's just plain wrong. It depends on the relation between rim diameter and tire-width. Or does this look perfectly circular to you: cdn.instructables.com/FU6/HD0C/HMMFB1X1/FU6HD0CHMMFB1X1.MEDIUM.jpg? It's not a bike but it showcases why you're wrong.

Also, you totally misunderstood my argument: It was basically saying that there are "more skinny" 29er tires that fit in a 29-only frame, and that 27,5+ tires total diameter might not be really equal to 29er outer.
  • 1 2
 @jts-nemo: You are plain wrong. The tire you show has a steel wire casing which bikes tires don't have. Bike tires are really circular (talking about the casing, not the thread shape cross section).
  • 1 2
 @jts-nemo: And no matter the rim width or tire dimensions, the rubber part of you're bike wheel is circular, just take a look at it.
  • 1 0
 @brutalpedz: Well, that is not true. It is a segment of a circle, that is clearly true. But not "circular" as in "forming a whole circle", only "roung" and the rim adds a flat part to it. Also the tire i've shown was just an illustration of a "small" tire on a wide rim, the metal casing does not matter for that (if you really can't look beyond that irrelevant imperfection in the analogy, here is a picture that clearly shows it to you an a "MTB": fstatic3.mtb-news.de/f/xz/vs/xzvsxt0yn5bu/large_image_1367944012022019.jpg?0).

Just imagine the extreme case: A rim as wide as the whole tire cross-section. Then you get a completely flat tire on the rim.
Put a 1.5" or 2" tire on a real fat-bike rim. If you can seriously tell me that the distance from rim to the apex of the tire above it is the same as the the tire diameter at it's max, well, show me a photo or else suck it up, it's simple geometry. Or just look at the image above and accept it.

Also, you might want to try not to be so defensive when the content of your post gets called out as wrong. It's not a personal insult, and it is a fact that you were wrong on all accounts, not an opinion, not something to argue about. This comment is not about arguing with you as one does in a discussion where there can be different outcomes, but simply showing you why what you said was wrong. Feel free to downvote me (if that makes you feel better), that does not invalidate what I said in the slightest, just tells everyone something about you.
  • 1 0
 I put a pair of 29er wheels on my 770 pipeline the other day and they fit fine with pleanty of room. I think it just screws the geometry up a bit or something
  • 13 2
 Are those Kashima coated valve stems?
  • 8 1
 Is anyone else noticing a trend here, that the "performance" plus sizes are going to narrower tires? Santa Cruz Hightower, the Rocky Mtn... Plus size is probably great for rocky & loose areas like SoCal, Sedona, etc, but here in the PNW a good 2.3" or 2.4" tire is all most people need.
  • 3 2
 I don't think need has a lot to do with it. From a traction standpoint, most riders don't ride anywhere close to the traction limit of their tires. The traction limit of a 2.4" knobby is pretty ridiculous. The tires are more capable than their riders. The 'most people' you refer to could likely benefit from a tire that helps iron out their many mistakes in line choice and their marginal cornering talent. Maybe plus tires are just being realistic about who 90 percent of these bikes are being sold to.
  • 1 1
 @AllMountin: If that's the case, then it would be nice to not have the bike industry shoving another standard down our throats. I corner just fine on my 2.3's in winter, 2.4's in the dryer summer months.
  • 4 0
 So, could you, or would you want to, run with a set of standard 27.5 wheels and tires (2.35 - 2.5) on this bike? Would it be a good option to offer different riding characteristics with one bike? Would it possibly drop the BB too low and/or change the geometry too much?
  • 19 1
 27.5 on the front, 24 on the back, too slack for the bike rack
  • 1 0
 @kurtwerby The only thing you'd be changing to is narrower rims and slightly narrower tires... there would be no difference in anything else. Where you could be making a difference to the bike is taking advantage of the extra clearance afforded by a 27.5+ bike and getting a normal set of 29er wheels to put on there. I've seen a few people do this with their sherpa's
  • 1 1
 @medievalbiking: 00's Bighit?
  • 2 0
 @Takeshi194: My inspiration
  • 9 3
 Plus size seems like a solution looking for a problem to me.
  • 1 0
 I own the 770 pipeline. Only thing I changed from stock was the dropper to the factory fox transfer. The bike climbs as well as I need it too...rides down hill better than I should ride, and makes up for times when I am riding a little outside my skill level. I should have had a few broken bones over the last year that I have had this bike but it saved me. And in the end I would rather get down the hill a little easier than I should with a smile on my face than be airlifted off the hill because I bit off more than I can chew and didn't know it.
  • 5 0
 This is one pipeline I would support
  • 4 0
 Anyone fondly remember Michelin 2.8's and double wides?
  • 2 0
 These were the good old times… one wheel size (almost, forgot about these 24") Wink , one rear axle standard, no "trail bike vs AM vs Enduro" game… we were just looking to have fun on our bikes!
  • 1 2
 This bike is probably a good choice for people like myself that aren't so good at being nice to their wheels. I run 2.4" on my 26" bike now and while it's been the best tire size so far, a little extra protection from the extra tire volume so long as it isn't super slow, would be a good thing.
  • 8 5
 One more perfect RM bike
  • 2 1
 Nice bike,but frankly I'm fed up with people calling EVOLUTION to all that's merely OPTION.
  • 2 3
 If I'm riding Pipeline, it's gonna be in Hawaii on a surfboard.
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.023680
Mobile Version of Website