Depends, I know the Wednesday has a fairly narrow Q-factor for a fattie but still, I had some pedal strike issues due to the cranks being so fucking wide that it dropped pedals a lot lower with any kind of lean. I had to train myself to throw the bike over to the alternate side a bit when Jeeping through narrow rocky stuff.
TC: This is my favorite type of race and the ones I always did best at.
[quote=akasnowmaaan]But, on the fat side, I can say personally that the 29+/5" fat match is bang on.
And nobody gives a shit about 26+ except Surly.
And this chart doesn’t show that a 4" fat tired bike is really close to a 27.5+ bike - a much better match than 29er, really. Lots of people on Bucksaws throw 27.5+ wheel sets on in the summer.[/quote]
this is kind of my conundrum, here. I have 3.8" nates on the Wednesday currently and want to keep dat rear tire ramjammed up against the seat tube for the shortest possible chainstay length. Plus I already run 170mm crank arms because I am a short dude. Basically, I don’t want the geo to change too much from the current setup to avoid pedal strike, and I don’t want to buy a new bike, I just want to go to a lighter platform and shreddier tire during spring/summer/fall without as much bounce and self-steer. Hence, originally thinking 27.5+ and resigning my fat wheelset to winter use with the biggest possible snow tires I can get in the frame.
I found the Surly tire geo chart and it looks like the outer diameter of Nates works out to about 745mm, which is probably about equal to what a 27.5x3 Rocket Ron, WTB Ranger or Maxxis Chronicle would get me. 29+ would be a lot bigger. Probably too much wheel/tire for a small guy in non-winter conditions.
TC: This is my favorite type of race and the ones I always did best at.[/quote]
Haha +1. The OPEN will CRUSH the grass crits!
Yes it is indeed a 46/36. Shit. That changes things…however a 36/32 should still be fine. I loved that gearing when I had it on the Speedvagen. I figure I’ll run a single 38t up front and 11-32 in the back for CX.
Currently pretty pissed at my 52/36 up front. Mind-numbingly stupid to design a bike around larger tires — for endurance — and put that kind of gearing up front. Of course I could stand to get stronger too.
I run 46/30 11-32 and it is more than enough range for 99% of my (hilly Seattle) riding. Once or twice a year I run into a sustained 15%+ climb while bikepacking and wish I had just a bit more gearing.
That said I’ve spent quite a bit of time considering/dithering the perfect drivetrain setup for my next hypothetical build. Probably won’t get serious for at least a year so by then we’ll have 15 speed 8-65 tooth SpaceEagle sprockets but working with today’s offerings I would do 48/32 or 46/32 with an 11-36 if 2x or fullEagle with 11-50 and a 46t if 1x.
FWIW I’m 150lbs wet, and the low is actually 36-32 not 30-32.
I also live in the flatass flatlands, so the 36 will suit me better day-to-day.
Oh Jesus fuck 29+ is HUGE. They’re great for me, and as Fred said, I’m Shrek. 260-something and 6-2.
If you want to get rad, go 27.5+. The only way I’d ride 29+ if I were you is to get an absolute juggernaut of a bike packing rig, and are sacrificing tons of agility for straight-line momentum.
I’m grabbing my 29+ wheelset out of my attic tomorrow, I’ll post a shot of them next to my 34mm studded road tires and 5" fat tires if you want to see how they compare.
taking the stupid CX-specific gearing off for actual cyclocross racing is even more stupid, especially doing all the work to uncable the FD that would be keeping your chain on
According to my notes:
The WTB Trailbrazzer was really undersized, they ended up at 720mm.
The newer B+ tires are bigger, so a Trax Fatty is 738.
29 x 2.4 Racing Ralphs are 744.
Nate is 745.
29+ Knard is 756, 29+ Trax Fatty is 764.
Oh Jesus fuck 29+ is HUGE. They’re great for me, and as Fred said, I’m Shrek. 260-something and 6-2.
If you want to get rad, go 27.5+. The only way I’d ride 29+ if I were you is to get an absolute juggernaut of a bike packing rig, and are sacrificing tons of agility for straight-line momentum.
I’m grabbing my 29+ wheelset out of my attic tomorrow, I’ll post a shot of them next to my 34mm studded road tires and 5" fat tires if you want to see how they compare.[/quote]
I ride 29+ and I got Kelley on a Krampus because it was on sale and cheaper than replacing wheels/drivetrain on her Ogre. She is about 5’7" and rides a Size Small Krampus, which is a ridiculous looking bike, but she loves it. I don’t think height is absolutely correlated with wheel size, you can futz around on a big-wheeled bike if you think you might like it.
29+ is awesome for momentum. It’s awesome for rolling over everything. It’s awesome for bikepacking, like really awesome. But, it’s not nearly as much fun on shreddy singletrack as a slightly smaller wheel size. I liked my 29er with 2.4" tires better for singletrack, and that’s only a half-inch narrower. I like 27.5+ even more.
I agree with others that 27.5+ with a proper 3" tire instead of 2.8 ought to be the right way to go on your Wednesday. But, the 29+ wheelset is also fun in it’s own way, and if your use is more “Explore the Beautiful Forest” than “Shred The Fucking Forest” you might like it. I’m definitely the former.
Kelley’s Krampus:
[quote=mdilthey]
I ride 29+ and I got Kelley on a Krampus because it was on sale and cheaper than replacing wheels/drivetrain on her Ogre. She is about 5’7" and rides a Size Small Krampus, which is a ridiculous looking bike, but she loves it. I don’t think height is absolutely correlated with wheel size, you can futz around on a big-wheeled bike if you think you might like it.
29+ is awesome for momentum. It’s awesome for rolling over everything. It’s awesome for bikepacking, like really awesome. But, it’s not nearly as much fun on shreddy singletrack as a slightly smaller wheel size. I liked my 29er with 2.4" tires better for singletrack, and that’s only a half-inch narrower. I like 27.5+ even more.
I agree with others that 27.5+ with a proper 3" tire instead of 2.8 ought to be the right way to go on your Wednesday. But, the 29+ wheelset is also fun in it’s own way, and if your use is more “Explore the Beautiful Forest” than “Shred The Fucking Forest” you might like it. I’m definitely the former. [/quote]
this bike is for exploring the beautiful forest:
Wednesday is for Shredding the Fucking Forest
back to the original plan it seems
Absolutely loved my Trek Stache+ until it was stolen. I’ve been waiting for 5 months but on Monday I can EP another one.
taking the stupid CX-specific gearing off for actual cyclocross racing is even more stupid, especially doing all the work to uncable the FD that would be keeping your chain on[/quote]
Yes, just came to the same conclusion while out riding. Also realized I may want a stupid 11-36 in reality.
Rode the new nerd cranks two miles to get a burrito with a friend and… well… I think I wasted $70 on this experiment. I don’t think there is any way to get satisfactory shifting with the WI cranks as a double. I guess I’ll go back to my old Suginos that happen to be perfectly designed to run a triple as a double with a perfect chainline. I just wish they were 94bcd rather than 110bcd. When the FSA options are more available I can grab one.
Realistically, though, I’ve never had any serious difficulty with the 48/34 & 11-28. I ran this gearing most of last year. In most cases, if I was under geared the gravel road didn’t have enough traction anyways, or it was just as fast to push the bike.
I bet I can sell the crankset and chainrings for $70 to some other nerd. It’d probably be a good double for someone’s MTB city cruiser?
Yes, I had those exact cranks set up 44/30 on an old Rockhopper, then on a Bstone MB.
I think the only choices for MTB -> NRD cranks are the few 94 BCD cranks that still ran ~120mm bottom brackets, namely the Ritchey and at least the first generation of Suntour XC Pros.
There’s also the TA Carmina, but for some reason I never see people run those. Maybe the price, maybe only PJW sells them. Dunno.
I guess I should hold on to the set in the off chance I get my hands on one of those ritcheys.
Edit: yeah. I’d love a high-zoot NRD crank like a TA but I am one cheap dude.
Do any cranks with removable spiders come in 180-185mm and acceptable Q? Other than Carminas
White Industries does 180mm, with mildly more acceptable quality than the Carminas
Lightning does full carbon 180 182.5 185 190 and has a bunch of spider options, but BSA30 isn’t perfect (there’s also the Specialized licensed version of this in 180)
Rotor does 180mm in 24mm and 30mm spindles, and has their own fancy 46/30 spiderring coming out
SRAM only goes up to 177.5 now
DQ: Why aren’t you nerd crank guys just buying up 110/74 triples and throwing a 46 on the middle ring? are the available 94 bcd rings properly ramped/ pinned?