Long lowers are long.
Was it xc that did 29 first as well? I know the gravity people were quite hesitant to go up in wheel sizes.
Anyway thatās a nice black mountain cycles
3 Likes
Kinda looks like an adapter on 29ā lowers
2 Likes
yeah itās a custom extension on the dropouts.
do we still call them dropouts?
Fork feet
4 Likes
rod wranglers
hub huggers
If the lowers are called fork legs, then the fork ends would be the feet
2 Likes
Was def XC to do big wheel first. What I heard is that it took a while to get 29er wheels strong enough for downhill without making them stupid heavy. But that was back before carbon ntb wheels was common.
This is an informative blog post about it.
Charlie Cunningham was a prime mover, and even did one of the first mullet bikes with 29"/26".
Bruce Gordon figured large as well.
Dat contraption.
4 Likes
What I hear a lot is geometry considerations. For example, a larger diameter rear wheel gets your butt that much closer to the tire when pointing down. A lot of folks are running 27.5/29 today in part for this reason.
The closeup is interesting. looks like they prototype with some machined parts combined with carbon tubes, but the ST/TT junction looks monocoque carbon? So maybe itās recycled from an exciting design
Would be cool to see more frankenbikes like this
Downhill World Cup pit reports/photos/āpit bitsā from pinkbike, vital mtb, definitely some others that I canāt name off the top of my head. Theyāre playing with chainstay length, engineering frame flex with replaceable frame components of varying stiffness, and a handful of other things I donāt remember. Lots of custom carbon.
Pivot rider Bernard Kerr had a lugged carbon prototype basically explode under him last year. Fun stuff!
just found out that these shoes that would perfectly match my hd6 exist
now i want them badly. anyone know if you can get a direct prodeal from fox? i cant afford that msrp after that $1000 root canal debacle.
4 Likes
so did the sturdy dirty this weekend. my first enduro in like 7 years.
overall it went decently. i ended up 8th out of 51 in my age group. my times on the first two stages were not great. stage 1 was extremely long and the fatigue was pretty bad. stage 4, which was my 2nd stage, was twisty and i didnāt get into a rhythm and just jammed on the brakes a little too hard in all the corners i think.
the second two stages i did well, but not enough to make up for time lost on the first two. the first two were also the slightly more technical stages, so probably favored the locals a bit better. it is not surprising that i did best on the final stage, which was a flow trail, because i ride flow and jumps many hours a week at the bike park.
iām a few months away from turning 40, so i do think itās fair to compare myself to the 40-49 group where i would have finished 3rd.
overall a success and now i am wondering if should do some more races next year.
25 Likes
yes
2 Likes
My wife also did the same course. She was a bit the opposite of Amy, doing better on CCDH and then losing about 3 spots on the last flow trail. She def said she was getting tired on the final one, and isnāt the best at pumping and just letting it go on some of that.
She wants to try and get in shape enough to finish the expert, if for no other reason it features more of the techy trails that she tends to do better on. But thatās a lot of climbing. At least the weather was chill for July.
She was comparing some times against two women she races on our Wednesday series. One she usually beats, unless it is super pedally, and one who is her goal to equal in the next year or so. Turns out the normally slower one dusted them both. Nice she at least had some reference for how she did besides final placement.
2 Likes
yeah, i kinda forgot what the pro course looked like in terms of distance/gain. 20 miles and 4400 ft is no joke.
Thatās 600 feet short of a āfull dayā out ATMO.