Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Downhill & Freeride' started by iRider, Nov 7, 2009.
Oh boy, let the hate begin!
Please register to disable this ad.
I like it
Gotta be a member to see the pics, does someone wanna throw them up here?
Now the Dorado 29'er make perfect sense.
A medium frame with a 48" wheelbase, 29" wheels, and 64.5* HA (on a 29er...) doesn't sound appealing to me at all. This fad is so far out from legitamacy before they get both their numbers dialed and manufacturers on board. It took the XC market forever, and theres far more money involved there.
If your direct linking pics from MTBR you will be able to see them but nobody else unless they have an MTBR account too
I cannot see these pics.
I created an account and got some of the pics for those who don't see them.
Looks weird! I would like to see a DH 69er myself (26R 29F)
Get advantages of better front end performance without the weak rear wheel and frame compatibility problems.
There is no God.
The answer to a question no one asked...
Looks like a kids bike. Meh 29ers, still can't see the point!
Love it and I dont understand how people can bitch about such an awsome bike.
Obviously people are wondering about this and im curious to see where this is going.
Awsome bike Jeff!
I like it alot! If the dh-tire choice in 29er improves I´ll be getting one for sure.
Great for fireroads
I think its great! It looks very well thought out, the numbers look right on. You'd probably be amazed at how stable that bike would feel. Put me on the list for one.
DH is a lot closer to dirt biking or BMX for that mater than road biking, XC not so much. For that reason alone I don't know why someone would even build a bike like this. Hell I'd take 24s front and back way before a 29er DH bike.
Obviosly the best design so far.
I don't think 29er DH bikes will ever be mainstream or all that popular, on the other hand maybe people will "design" DH runs for them, as plenty of people around here have seemed to design trails for 29er hardtails. 650b on the other hand....that could replace everything 26" IMO.
D - u - m - b
what would make a trail or run be "designed" for a 26 or 29?
I'm definitely bike-curious to see how it runs...
Old school runs that don't require a proper modern DH bike like the Kamikaze DH at Mammoth Mountain...
All the guys on the newer 5 and 6" 29ers proclaiming how good they are for "downhill", only come to find out they're talking about Downieville and other semi-downhill mostly non-tech stuff.
So basically wider turns, slopes not as steep, not as many drops/jumps.
It has two wheels, 8 inches of travel and it's made to go downhill. I like it. Who cares if it's not your cup of tea, innovation and pushing the envelope is always good for a sport that relies so heavily on technology like ours.
I want to see new ideas that make dh bikes more durable. Not weaker and heavier. Lets find a way to make derailluers go away. Not fit bigger wheels on our bikes.
Go out and design something new then. Don't sit by and complain while others are innovating and pushing the sport.
I think it's good to see something new being tried, even if it eventually fails. How does the rolling circumference of the front tire on a motorcross bike compare to that on a mountain bike?
So that angry old men can join the downhill crowd and tell everybody in the lift line how superior big wheels are.
3 pages already, on a saturday, in the off season.
3 Pages? You need to change your settings...Noob
Good on em for doing something different. IIRC when the M1 first started making a splash, it had a "radical" 66 degree head angle that shook everyone else up, and took some manufacturers the best part of a decade to finally catch up to. This geometry is whack by current standards, but let's not forget that 4 or 5 years ago, Barel was winning Worlds on a bike with a 60 degree head angle and some insanely low BB, and only now we're starting to see super slack bikes between 61-63 degrees become quite commonplace.
I sure as hell wouldn't buy one but good on em for trying it out. Ok sure, it might flop hard, but you never know for sure unless you try. For example 10-12 years ago most manufacturers were refusing to build bikes with these "ridiculously slack" head angles (in fact some manufacturers like Turner took till only a couple of years ago to finally get a head angle below what was it, 67*?) because they simply refused to believe it could be better since it just wasn't the status quo. Now Mondraker have a production bike with a 61* head angle. 48" WB is huge, as is the chainstay length, and no doubt it'd require a different riding style to get the most out of, but who's to say it wouldn't get you down a racecourse faster in the end? You simply don't know without trying it.
All Geoff needs to do is sign Sam Hill to ride it in 2010 and he'll sell bucketloads of them.
I know of two WC level riders (one of them just a WC competitor, one having posted a top 10) who have been saying for quite a while that they want a 29er dh bike. They are both big guys though, one 6'2" and one is 6'7".
I'd love to try it out and hope that we see some rims and tyres in 29" suitable for DH coming out soon.
What´s next,a 29" BMX???
I really really REALLY don't need a heavier,weaker,slower-to-get-up-to-speed-and-stop set of wheels on any of my bikes,thank you very much mister manufacter.
Id try it, bigger wheels ride over rocks easier, when is the last time a skateboard made it over a piece of gravel, it is a great idea i think, i do disagree with the rear hub still being a 135/150. Taller distance should have a wider hub.