Quantcast

Intense 29er DH bike

Banshee Rider

Turbo Monkey
Jul 31, 2003
1,456
10
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.
 

MrPlow

Monkey
Sep 9, 2004
630
0
Toowoomba Queensland
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.
 

RD3

Monkey
Nov 30, 2003
661
11
PA
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.
 

stinky6

Monkey
Dec 24, 2004
517
0
Monroe
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.
 

Jm_

Turbo Monkey
Jan 14, 2002
9,743
2,093
AK
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.
 

kickstand

Turbo Monkey
Sep 18, 2009
3,445
392
Fenton, MI
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.
what would make a trail or run be "designed" for a 26 or 29?
 

Jm_

Turbo Monkey
Jan 14, 2002
9,743
2,093
AK
what would make a trail or run be "designed" for a 26 or 29?
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.
 

mattmatt86

Turbo Monkey
Feb 9, 2005
5,354
10
Bleedmore, Murderland
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.
 

vtminuteman

Monkey
Nov 29, 2004
166
0
Sharon VT
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.
 

Jason4

Monkey
Aug 27, 2008
338
0
Bellingham
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?
 

Steve M

Turbo Monkey
Mar 3, 2007
1,995
23
Whistler
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.
 

Floor Tom

Monkey
Sep 28, 2009
220
26
Scotland
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.
 

Nozzes

Chimp
Mar 10, 2009
22
0
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.
 

demo 9

Turbo Monkey
Jan 31, 2007
5,911
45
north jersey
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.