You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Hi guys,
Lookin or my first entrance into the workd of 29ers and wanting to go SS Rigid as a starter. I've been offered a full carbon frame and forks or a steel (on one) frame and carbon forks by 2 kind members. The carbon package is bit more expensive but don't know whether (on a tight budget) I should stick with steel and not worry about weight. Or go carbon. Should I invest in a lighter frame and spend more or stick with trusty steel. My other bike is a 853 lobster so I do love steel!
I'm planning mostly trail centre riding. Rookie questions but any suggestions?
Thanks
Carbon. There is no room in the heart for two steel bikes. You'll feel dirty after riding the new one 😉
Seriously, look at the geometry. Pick the one that is closest to your Lobster, if that has the handling you really like.
On One steel is gonna be heavy compared to your 853 frame.
Well the geometry will be nothing like the lobster, 29ers are different just to get them to feel similar to 26" bikes. What's the carbon bike? Niner, tallboy, lurcher? The on-one isn't the lightest but has a good reputation, I'd put that ahead of an unknown quantity.
Just get the one that fits. And remember 29ers arent all the same, just as 26" bikes are all different. The frame material will probably be the least of their differences (unless its an O_O lurcher or race29).
I like the "chuck it in the boot of the car and not worry about scratching or denting it" nature of steel bikes, I'm eternaly parranoid about pedal pins scraping a hole in alloy frames in transit, steels just tougher.
Thanks guys. Guess to comes to budget also. Am I better off shelling out for a carbon frame or steel frame with better wheels?
It's a Fluid Cycles carbon frame with very similar geometry to the On One. Perhaps a few mm longer backend. I'm never going to be a fast rider so want something fun!
Fun, tough, not worrying about it - go for the cheaper steel one. You're building it rigid ss, so its not going to weigh much anyway. And if it frees up more money for some better wheels - pref tubeless as you are running it rigid, then all the better.
For trail centre use I wouldn't reccommend going fully rigid, unless you plan on running REALLY fat tyres. All that bollocks that used to be spouted about 29 inch wheels being worth 20, 40, 60mm or whatever of suspension travel is just that. A load of bollocks. Big wheels might be slowed down less by bumps but you still feel them through the handlebars, even more so with the steeper head angles 29ers usually have. When I ran my 29er rigid I tried both carbon and steel forks and it was always loads harsher than my 26 inch wheeled Surly 1x1.
Having owned an Inbred 29er and built a carbon 29er ht I would go for the carbon frame providing the geometry suits you. Inbred frames aren't light by any means!
I'd carefully consider which wheelset can be brought in on budget as imo a steel frame with a nice light tubeless wheelset will ride nicer than a carbon frame with cheap/heavy wheels. And if you do go fully rigid, nice big tyres run tubeless at low pressures will really help.
I'm sure someone will be along in a bit to say the opposite, but that's what I'd go for.
Thanks for replies so far. Frame and forks working out at around £50 difference total so not much really.
I'd buy the steel one.
But I'm biased.
And trying to sell you the steel one...
Honestly, it's a tricky dilemna. I think I'd choose the Inbred because of the flexibility. I've ridden that frame in so many configurations- rigid single speed, rigid geared, FS single speed, FS geared- hell I even rode it round Thailand and Ethiopia as a touring bike. It's a great frame- but, as has been said it's not the lightest in the world.
A tricky dilemna...
Thanks all much appreciated advice and no one suggesting aluminium!
To me an aluminium frame is something you end up with and not something you aspire to own.
Steel is my vote. If you're doing trail centres why not put some suspension forks on it?
If the inbred is an 18 and doesn't sell I maybe interested anyway...
If the inbred is an 18 and doesn't sell I maybe interested anyway...
I have a tinbred but want something heavier for winter/training!
I was sold on carbon after having ridden my carbon dirty harry down the road and back.
My first carbon bike is a rigid 29er and reckon it'll be a keeper as soon as I find time to ride it.
Another carbon dirty harry owner - Also SS, but with reba forks - also owner of several steel bikes over the years, Lobster 853, PA 853, inbred, voodo wanga. The Dirty Harry has the same soft tail feel, sure a very perky ride, but as soft as steel. Possibly the tubeless 2.2 tyres help a little. Sold on the DH due to the conventional bottom bracket. Riding like I stole it until it breaks. I had a carbon anthem and that was very strong and quick. For £50 - go carbon.
Conversely I've been riding a Reynolds 725 steel framed rigid 29'er for a month or so and with a big ass tyre (2.3" Bonty 29-4) up front run tubeless it's not harsh, granted it's not as smooth as a boingy forked frame but it sure as hell doesn't shake you to bits or jar you around on normal trails.
Personally I'd go steel with decent wheels
My brain is hurting!
Conversely I've been riding a Reynolds 725 steel framed rigid 29'er for a month or so
What frame?
Steel.
Every time.