2014 Specialized S-Works Enduro 29 SE - First Look and First Ride
FIRST RIDE
Specialized S-Works Enduro 29 SE
WORDS: Matt Wragg & Richard Cunningham
Specialized unveiled a breakthrough 29er in Finale Ligure, Italy, that handily solves some of the major issues that have, up until now, restricted the rear wheel travel of most big-wheel bikes to around 120-millimeters and tire widths at or below 2.3 inches. The Enduro 29 SE is aimed directly at international enduro competition, with 155-millimeters of wheel travel, make-it-happen geometry and frame clearance for full size tires up to 2.5 inches wide. Right about now, naysayers are probably quoting a handful of pre-existing 29ers with similar travel, but such numbers, especially in the arena of big-wheel bike design, are misleading. Enduro 29 SE frames sport a 430-millimeter (16.9 inch) chainstay length. That's only eleven millimeters longer than the already compact stays of the 26-inch Specialized Enduro. Comparatively, that is over 25-millimeters shorter than the best 29ers in the 120 to 130-millimeter range. You'd need a yardstick to measure the chainstay lengths of most 29ers with rear-wheel travel longer than that. Starting with a rear end that compares to a 26-inch all-mountain design ensures that the Enduro 29 will turn, climb and maneuver with similar nimbleness - attributes that have eluded all but the most elite 29ers to date. Up front, the Enduro 29 backs up its promise of on-trail performance with a 67.5-degree head angle and a 150mm Fox 34 Float CTD fork. Between the wheels is a cleverly designed frame with an x-braced carbon fiber front section, suspended by a welded aluminum FSR rear end.
 |
 A look at the frame reveals a compact carbon front section - squeezed by the fact that the seat tube was moved well forward to provide tire clearance for the additional rear-suspension travel. The Enduro 29 SE's actual seat tube angle is 69 degrees, but an imaginary line from the crank axle through the seatpost head, measured at an average ride-height, works out to an effective angle of approximately 75 degrees. |
Specialized also went all out in the component department. The top-range S-Works Enduro 29 SE is built around SRAM's XXI wide-range one-by-eleven transmission and four-piston X.0 brakes.The S-Works 29er rolls on Specialized's recently released Roval Traverse SL tubeless carbon fiber wheelset, and up top it gets the new internal-cable Command Post IR dropper and a host of Specialized cockpit items, mostly crafted from carbon fiber. At the heart of the S-Works Enduro is a Cane Creek Double Barrel Air shock, which has been factory tuned for the bike. For those interested, the Enduro 29 SE will be available in three models, with the S-Works (tested) starting at $9,000 USD, followed by the more-affordable Expert Carbon and Comp. Sizes are medium, large and x-large (Specialized's magic, unfortunately could not shrink the height of a 29er) and the stated weight for the S-Works Enduro 29 SE is 27.6 pounds (12.55kg).
Construction Details
Presenting the Enduro 29 SE to the assembled journalists, Brandon Sloan, the bike's designer, read out a mind-bending list of numbers and details, like 155 millimeters of rear-wheel travel, 430-millimeter chainstays and a 67.5-degree head-angle. To put those numbers into context, Niner gets 140 millimeters from their WFO and the Santa Cruz Tall Boy LT has 135 millimeters. More than that, the Enduro 29's chainstay length is significantly shorter than many 160 millimeter travel 26-inch bikes. When pressed as to how Specialized achieved those numbers, the answer was not magical. The engineers looked at every aspect of the frame design where they could squeeze out more clearance and also selected components that offered the same advantages. The end result is a long-travel 29er in a compact package - the wheelbase is just 1159 millimeters for the medium sized bike.
 |
| The removable 'Taco Blade' front derailleur mount (left) is a space saver and it freed the designers to move the seat tube well forward of the cramped bottom bracket area. Specialized invented the chin-shaped seat stay arch (right) to clear the seat tube at full compression. |
The seat tube is moved forward and curved to clear the tire at full compression and the swingarm was ovalized near the bottom bracket to make room for larger tires. The chin-shaped lower brace at the upper end of the seat stay linkage is thinned and profiled to miss the seat tube. Using SRAM's XXI single-chainring crankset bought a lot of tire clearance, and in the case of the Expert Carbon and Comp models, which use a two-by-ten drivetrain, Specialized devised a thin, swingarm-mounted front derailleur bracket called the 'Taco Blade' to squeeze between the rear tire and its SRAM bottom-pull front mech. By affecting a number of small improvements in the critical bottom bracket area of the Enduro 29's rear suspension, Specialized gained an inch of rear-wheel travel and room for full-sized racing tires.
 |
| (Left) Specialized calls it an X-Wing frame design. The cross-braced front section has been the trademark feature of its Enduro series. S-Works models get the new Cane Creek DBair shock, which can be tuned externally to suit almost any riding style. (Right) The 142x12-millimeter through-axle is a must for true all-mountain abuse. |
 |
.
Component Highlights
At the heart of the S-Works bike we were riding was a handmade Fact 11M carbon frame - this is Specialized's highest standard carbon for mountain bikes.The cranks turn on a PF30 press-fit bottom bracket and out back is a 142x12-millimeter rear axle. A Cane Creek Double Barrel Air shock controls the rear wheel and a travel-adjustable Fox TALAS 34 CTD fork sits out front. Impressively (1640-gram/pair) light Roval Traverse SL wheels are shod with Specialized-brand 2.3-inch Butcher and Purgatory Control tires, and the DT-Swiss made rear wheel contains the special freehub to mount the SRAM XX1 cassette.
 |
 |
| (Clockwise) SRAM/Avid four-piston Trail Brakes with semi-metallic pads clamp 200-millimeter rotors. S-Works Enduro 29 SE models feature the SRAM XXI eleven-speed drivetrain with its impossibly small-looking 30-tooth chainring. Specialized also includes a 28-tooth ring in the kit. |
The S-Works Enduro 29's drivetrain is XX1, paired with SRAM's four-piston XO Trail brakes. It is worth noting that Specialized chose to mount an e*thirteen XCX+ top guide and did not rely solely on SRAM's claim that its XX1 sprocket will keep the chain in order. The test bike had the standard Specialized Command Post Blacklight, but production Enduros will have the 'IR' version with internal cable routing. Up front were a 720mm Specialized-branded bar and 60-millimeter stem, and there was some discussion as to what sizes would see production. For the test, I swapped those out for my benchmark Renthal 760-millimeter handlebar and 50-millimeter stem combination.
S-Works Enduro 29 SE
First impressions
 | Knowing I was going to ride Specialized's Enduro 29 made me nervous. I freely admit that I think its 26 inch-wheeled brother is the best all-round mountain bike out there. It's the one mountain bike I actually own, the one I don't need to worry about explaining in a review or handing back all-too-soon. So to find out they'd butchered big, circus wheels into a new version of it worried me. Driving down to the camp I spent my time trying to figure out how I'd explain to the people who had poured hours of their time into this bike that it was an abomination. How do you tell someone that they've taken a great bike and turned it into something that would make the baby Jesus weep? - Matt Wragg |
Suspension setup: I use a decidedly stiff setup for my suspension. Fox's Float CTD forks have a tendency to blow through their travel, so sorting this out was where I started with the new Enduro. For me, having the fork stand up in the travel is always the winner because I push the bike hard, but it comes at the expense of low-speed sensitivity and outright comfort. When the going gets ugly, having the front end dive can either cause the bike to fold under you or send you out the front door. I have the scar tissue to testify to that. To achieve this, I run the air spring very hard and leave the CTD adjuster in the medium, 'Trail' setting as a default to add more compression damping. This makes for a fork that feels unforgiving at low speeds, but as you get faster and hit things harder it comes alive and keeps you out of trouble when you most need it to. Matching the fork meant putting a lot of pressure into the Cane Creek Double Barrel air shock, which was a real shame, because I didn't scratch the surface of the this fully-adjustable shock's amazing potential.
Climbing: We didn't spend much time climbing, so I can't report on how the bike does on longer drags, but as it's light, stiff and comfortable I wouldn't expect it to be anything other than fast. On short, steep climbs, the front end was a touch high and once I even caught myself reaching for the dreaded TALAS switch to lower the fork to get its front end back under control. With more time on the bike, this would be something I would want to play with to figure out whether I would need to adjust my technique, or try and lower the handlebar height.
Descending: The first thing you notice when you start going downhill on this bike, from the very first pedal stroke, is how fast it is. It picks up speed alarmingly. Even rolling into a straight from the trailhead it seems to find speed from nowhere. With the big wheels and relaxed geometry it feels strangely stable as well. You suddenly find yourself coming into corners and technical sections with far more pace than is comfortable. On the first couple of runs, this meant moments of total fear. Judging entry speed was tough and with the big circus wheels under me, there seemed to be no way the bike would be able to stick it. So I just went steaming in and prayed. After a few of those moments, a realization dawned on me. It wasn't blind faith getting me through the corners, but the bike. Once I started to trust it and give it some muscle, I began to understand just how capable this bike was.
Final Thoughts
As part of the launch, we took the bikes down a trail in Finale Ligure called Cacciatori (Hunters). It's one of the older trails in the zone and it has always been steep as hell, but years of neglect have turned it into a rock-strewn nightmare. Huge holes, rainwater channels and awkward rocks have been exposed, so what was once a tough trail is now a near-vertical minefield of baby head rocks. On that kind of terrain, the Enduro 29 was nothing short of impressive. I could nimbly skip between features, hold a line or turn the bike on a dime as the trail twisted back on itself. When I faced the holes, the big wheels made life easier, I felt a lot further from being thrown out the front door than I do on a 26-inch bike. Catching my breath at the bottom, I had to admit I was wrong about this bike. Cacciatori is the kind of trail that I assumed would feel horrible on a 29er, but the Enduro 29 felt in its element there.
 |
| Charging through rough sections felt comfortable aboard the Enduro 29er. Image by Marco Toniolo |
To further understand more about the differences between the 26 and 29-inch Enduros, I was lucky enough to take the bike back to one of my home trails. Taking the bike down a trail I knew inch-by-inch was the perfect opportunity to get my head around its finer points. While the handling is fast on the 29, faster than many 26-inch bikes even, I could catch it out. There is one section where you must kink between three rocks, threading a very fine line between them to stay off the brakes. On the 29 it didn't quite make it, there was almost a feel of understeer at the exit of the section and a handful of brake was needed to avoid the final rock. It was harder to flick through the technical sections that I am used to doing and to launch off tiny undulations in the trail. But we are talking tiny percentages and small details on a trail that I sometimes ride six times a week; they don't detract from how shockingly capable this bike is.
 |
 |
| Specialized's in-house kit: the impressive Roval Traverse SL wheelset and the Command Post Blacklight |
Component Report:
• SRAM's XX1: Good - XXI provided the crisp gear shifting I was expecting. Bad - on the second run of the first day I managed to snap the chain trying to put power down out of a corner. It's not clear how this happened and it seems to be a fairly unique event. The XO Trail brakes that accompanied it were a disappointment, they never offered quite enough power and the bite point felt vague and inconsistent. When it came to descending bigger mountains, they didn't survive the heat build-up well.
• Command Post Blacklight Dropper: Bad - the Specialized mechanical dropper had slightly too much air pressure in it and nearly took out one of my testicles. Good - after I'd taken some air out of the system, an easy job of popping the post off the bike and opening the valve at the base, it worked as well as I hoped it would.
• Roval Traverse SL wheels: Good - 'impressive' is the only word for the Roval wheelset. Over the short test period, I hit them as hard as I could and did my usual trick of landing everything at a weird angle, and they didn't complain once. The same goes for the hookless-bead tubeless system; the carbon rims held air perfectly and I can't report a single problem.
• Butcher and Purgatory Control Tires: Good - when the bike was upright, the Specialized tires were fast rolling and grippy. Bad - when I got them on their sides, they seemed to be lacking grip and didn't encourage me to push the bike hard. On loose, dusty trails they were not confidence inspiring on the edges and this is a shame because they rolled quite nicely. If Specialized beefed up the side profiles, they would be fantastic.
Pinkbike's take:
 | I was wrong about this bike. It was nothing like I feared it would be and, no matter how much I look at the numbers, I still don't really understand how Specialized have managed it. This bike, without question, pushes the boundaries of what is possible with a 29-inch wheeled bike. It also throws light back onto the question of whether or not we need 650B bikes when 29ers can handle like this. This bike blew away any preconceptions of what I thought a 29er could or should be, and for that reason alone I love it. Would I trade my 26-inch Enduro for the newer, bigger-wheeled version? Probably not, as personally I still prefer the immediacy of the smaller wheels, but it's a far closer call than I would have ever imagined it could be. -Matt Wragg |
www.specialized.com
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
And this concerns me "there was almost a feel of understeer at the exit of the section and a handful of brake was needed to avoid the final rock. It was harder to flick through the technical sections that I am used to doing and to launch off tiny undulations in the trail. But we are talking tiny percentages and small details on a trail"
The small details and boosting of tiny undulations is what makes riding fun. If I have to trade that in for a bigger set of wheels than no thanks!
If pro's ride 29 inch enduro bikes, we will have to dance like little puppets and accept what is thrown at us [or buy a different bike]. But I'm confident Specialized won't mess with us
Basically if you are shorter than 5'7", specialized says f*ck off and come back after you have had some growth hormone therapy.
My new bike!
These wagon wheelers do seem to be getting better though.
These big wheels are for us big boys...you little guys can keep those little wheels and just try and keep up.
wheel size is a matter of the hart, 26 is what my hart wants (more like demands).
all 29 fanboys will probably flame me (they always say no hating... when they are the ones on the attack!),but i don't care a 29" enduro is an anomaly and has no real use in enduro unless they change the rules and start timing uphills instead downhills.if this 29" thing catches on the enduro circuit then its only a matter of time until enduro becomes a glorified cross country race.
Fact of the matter is, the average North American male is 5'9 1/2". This is a documented piece of information that big companies (the military being the biggest) use to design human interactions. Average female is 5'6".
@donch15 hey I'll be thinking of you, next time you get seat 26E on a crowded Southwest Airlines flight.
1 deg difference in st angle will reflect in about 10mm in reach.
I manage to fit a medium specialized where i would ride a xl ibis or santacruz to have the same cockpit feel.
Another thing with specialized is that they run setback seat posts which adds close to an inch to the seat-bar distance.
But that's exactly the point. You're miniscule dimensions would look kind of ridiculous on a 29er...the same way my manly physique has looked kind of silly on XL frames with 26" wheels for the last 15 or so years.
Just like human beings getting taller...it's just evolution my friend.
Stack and reach is where it is at but Specializd fail to give us that.
If you really want to prove yourself, I'll forward you the Strava account of one of lower ranking women on Canada's national team. She is 5'3". On some of the technical trails here, the fastest guys on 180mm travel mega bikes can't keep up with her when she is on her dainty hardtail. And we are talking about freaking North Shore riders. The biggest gnarl in your neck of the woods is mickey mouse shit in comparison.
It is consistent with the regular specialized sizing. The reach will be about 430 mm and 455 mm respectively. This is actually quite on the long side.
Again every 1deg of steeper seat angle will have the same effect as adding 10mm to the top tube.
For example a bike with 72deg and 24in top tube will have aprox the same reach as 74.5 deg st angle and 23in TT
Reach should give you a pretty good idea of if a bike will be "long enough" and is probably the best way to compare bikes on paper. Its a shame not every manufacturer will list such data.
Also as far as the toptubes being short... you're also forgetting this is a twenty niner... the toptubes HAVE to be longer for a given nominal frame size because the wheel radius has increased. If you didn't increase the top and down tube lengths to stretch out the front of the bike, you'd have the toe of your foot striking the tire when you turned. Also the change in effective toptubes with geometry angle changes isn't the 10mm per degree you think it is. Salsa happens to list different measurements for different fork travels for their Horsethief 29er trail bike. And with a 20mm shorter fork, the angles get 0.9 degrees steeper at the seat and head tubes BOTH, but the effective toptube length only shrinks by 3mm.
Long travel bikes with big wheels aren't for small people. Vote with your wallet and buy a 26" Enduro.
@ampa...just b/c I don't live on the north shore doesn't mean I'm not a real mountain biker...why so much hate bro?
Perhaps we are really trying to say the same thing here. The point i am trying to make is that top tube lenght alone can be missleading.
To evaluate if your toes will hit the wheels, you want to look at the front center when comparing bikes. The front center is the product of the head angle, seat angle and top tube lenght. Wheelbase minus chainstay lenght is the easiest way to calculate front center.
There are so many variables when looking at geometry that i am at the point where i draw the geometry in cad before i buy a bike. This way i can measure exactly how i would fit on the bike. And that is still no substitute for trying the bike, not always an option unfortunately.
We could throw numbers all day long but the fact of the mather is that the specialized has a longer reach then the salsa horsethief in medium and large, wich seamed to be your concern at first.
Also the front center is 704mm and 724mm on the med and large salsa and specialized is 729 and 753 Respectively.Again less chances of interference with front wheel-feets on the specialized
Cheers
Ridden a 26er for 24 years. Love my Shinobi. Slightly trickier in really tight swtchbacks, more rotating mass but man the thing just floats over the chunder. Love it.
"The small details and boosting of tiny undulations is what makes riding fun. If I have to trade that in for a bigger set of wheels than no thanks!"
I like my Bandit 29 alot, but this is why I want to move back to a 26.
Why would I but a Santa Cruz, Spesh, or Trek when I can call the owner of Ventana, explain what I want and have it cost under $2500 for a custom frame? Not to mention the buy back policy that knocks 30% off!
Trying to compensate by raising the seatpost just throws th balance of th bik off when you have these wonky curved seat tubes.
Again, stack and reach are the only measurements that matter on these frames with non-conventional seat tubes.
I agree that at 6'5" this will be on the tight side but with a 70-80 mm stem you should be all set.
I am 6ft and ride a medium stumpy evo with a 75mm stem and it is just perfect.....right at the limit but it works really well.
What are you riding now?
That would be a longuer reach then 90% of the bikes companies out there. That would be even more then a yeti xl and way more then salsa
If the XL Enduro 29 truly has a reach of around 460 I'd be pretty happy. Can't afford it though!
This is from a couple months ago...but provides some decent foreshadowing.
“Twenty-six inch is taken off the menu,” said Jason Moeschler, WTB‘s OEM sales manager. “It may seem confusing now, but the industry has made the decision for the consumer.”
Better start stockpiling 26" tires now...
ST angle and TT length can be misleading.
We publish Stack and Reach for all our bikes at www.specialized.com and the 29er geos should be up shortly.
And this concerns me "there was almost a feel of understeer at the exit of the section and a handful of brake was needed to avoid the final rock. It was harder to flick through the technical sections that I am used to doing and to launch off tiny undulations in the trail. But we are talking tiny percentages and small details on a trail"
The small details and boosting of tiny undulations is what makes riding fun. If I have to trade that in for a bigger set of wheels than no thanks!"
While that is true you have to remember that he hasn't had long on the bike so he won't be completely used to it. I think you would find that he would get used to the bike and how to ride it aggressively.
I had before the stumpjumper 29 carbon, I sold it after two month, it didn't suit my style of riding. I don't have anything against it.
Everyone have their own style of riding and style of bike
I doubt a more realistically priced bike would have ridden as well - by that I mean minus the carbon frame, rims, XX1 gear, CCDBA, etc ... so is this as revolutionary as it appears?
It's people like you that cause unrest by exaggerating.. It's ONLY $9k. With $10k you get the Enduro 29 and a state of the art pit bike... /sarcasm>
As for Specialized "smashing" the 29er 120 barrier, it´s been don and by several companies with much smaller (not on Pinkbike) budgets. For example
the new On One Codine www.on-one.co.uk/news/products/q/date/2013/02/19/codeine
I´d love this bike...in it´s 26er guise.
Straight to the point.
From On-One - "Oh yeah - it's a 29er. 140-160mm fork, 128mm rear, 67deg head angle, 35mm BB drop, 440mm chainstays (that's 4mm shorter than our Scandal 29er hardtail!). Current frame weight 7.45lb. Planned frame weight 7lb. No production date is planned currently."
Notice the "128mm rear" and "no production date planned."
I am 174cm, and my guess is that 650b would fit me best. Interestingly enough, current XC World champion, who is about the same height, came to the same conclusion.
But I do not race the clock and 26" with a lot of suspension, stiff wheels and meaty tires works just splendid for me.
On the flipside, I found the wheels a bit odd to ride. They ride big. I think it's something I could get used to but for now I'm not certain. I'm told they're wicked going downhill, especially steep rock faces with abrupt transitions (which we have a lot of around here). Despite that I have trouble visualizing myself really railing corners the way I do on my 26" bike. I rode a 650b bike and instantly felt no doubt they would be awesome, but then again they're pretty close to a 26" wheel and no one yet makes a 650b bike anywhere close to the size of my XL Enduro.
I would too will sell my 2011 Enduro but only because I don't want to have anything to do with $pecialized any more after this act of obscenity with the new Enduro here.
The fit is about your size compared to the size of bike and wheel. Regardless of terrain, you dont want your mountain bike to ride like a folding bicycle, nor do you want it to ride like a penny-farthing.
So yea, there is a decent amount of preference involved, your type of riding, preferred terrain, riding style, etc. And yea, its possible to sacrifice some on the fit to get the advantages of a certain wheel size, but you have to strike the right balance. I'm 5'7, I'v ridden 29" and felt like an 8y old put on a full sized bike. On the other hand a friend of mine is 6'6 and whenever he sits on a bike I'm thinking why the hell dont they make bigger wheels, bigger cranks, bigger everything, for bigger riders. I think its all about finding the right balance, claiming either size is generally better/faster is absolute utter bollocks. PS. race tracks are designed with certain bikes in mind, so that's chicken or the egg.
Let me repeat myself....DONT BUY IT!!!
No one is shoving wheelsizes down your throats ladies and gentlemen. You only ride what you buy and and what you like.
If people want to get down on big wheels let them. Mountain biking has always been about having bikes the fit a wide range of riding disciplines and a wide range of rider personalities. This version of the enduro is just another step down a familiar path of finding a bike that will suit another riders needs, just maybe not your own.
Dont bash it, just get out and enjoy the ride
Every article that features a 29 inch bike, it's almost nothing but comments throwing fits about them. Oh god, what really is good for a laugh is how many people here think that the entire industry is in cahoots to ONLY screw you out of money and that they clearly don't care about the riders. The mind reels...
Also, you are flat out stating that it's the LOOK of the bike that makes you not want it. Not how it rides, now what situations it's better in or worse in, now how it performs, nothing that actually matters. JUST THE LOOK? Really? Is this what our sport is devolving into?
I know a lot of people here like to live in their bubble, where no one rides 29" bikes and everyone only rides 26" bikes, but unfortunately the vocal major demographic here is far from the one with the most purchasing power in this industry, especially when it comes to new.
Seriously, stop, step back, and take a look at the whole picture from the outside from a macroscopic view.
Btw. cyrix when ppl say they dont like the look, or say it looks wrong, I think they mean that the way it looks gives you a feeling that tells you that its stupid from a mechanical or biomechanical (or any other aspect, like having fun) point of view. Much like how one might say they find two males kissing looks wrong, its not like the males suddenly look ugly.
Complaining about new product releases won't change anything. The manufacturers will need you to vote with your wallet. If you can't vote with your wallet, then you don't get a say. Sorry, it may not seem fair, but this is how it works. If you can only afford sub $2000.00 bikes, and vote for 26" wheels, that is the market that will get them. The current AM voting is weighing heavily in the 650b camp. I can afford new equipment, and will be voting for 650b. I have one, like it, and think its a big enough revolution that I won't buy 26" again, other than on a pump track bike or something like that.
Specialized has a lot of eggs n the 29er basket, and they are willing to throw engineering resources at a bike like this. It would be interesting to see what happens to the market if they had three versions of the enduro: a 26", a 650b conversion based on the 26", and the 29er.
Is there a need for another wheel size? If the difference between these two bikes was massive I could see the argument, but its not
I'm not saying any wheel size is better or worse, just different, but you have to ask the question is it really a big enough advantage to warrant the extra expense to the manufacturers and customer.
If I just purchased a 650b or 29 I'd want my decision to be justifiable the same as if I'd invested in a 26 and I can see the merits of 29er for many applications and riders.
I'm not against innovation, quite the opposite. I want the latest and greatest but there comes a point you have to ask, are they just creating a new market for no real advantage, except to help them sell more bikes?
What if all of a sudden car manufacturers decided that the standard car rim size wasn't good enough ( yes I. know we have 4wd) and we all had to choose between 3 wheel sizes and that the car you have invested thousands of dollars is going to be obsolete.
Would be be angry? Bloody oath they would and you'd be asking is the advantage great enough to warrant it.
With that being said that's why I bought a mojo HD, I'm covering my arse.
BTW, auto wheels come in 12". 13", 14", 15", 16", 17" 18", 19" etc. There are 16.5" truck rims and the little used metric sizes. The range of widths in addition to diameters is even more diverse. How is this a disadvantage? The best size will be available for the consumer depending on their needs. Manufacturers have different bolt patterns and different offsets as well, often even front and back are different width and offset.
In regards to being able to use my old wheels on my new bike: Most of my 4+ year old wheels are 20mm internal or less, excepting my DH wheels, but they would be 3000g. I don't know why I would want to run my modern tires on those old wheels. If I upgrade the rim, then I am OK with a different diameter, as I will get new spokes anyway. I'm not seeing the downside. I have a 6" travel double crown with qr in the garage. I can't imagine using it for anything. Its compatible with my old wheels I guess.
I think you make some really good points, and this contributes to the debate in a positive way rather than the 29er are gay, 26er are dinosaurs and 650b are the new black.
The real purpose of these debates should be to convinced that formats that we once held dear, can be done in a better way and offer real advantages, not just ways of making us upgrade more often.
You're absolutely right. That's sane logical thinking.
Spesh UK if you are reading this - have a word with yourselves. Enduro is the fastest growing scene in mountainbiking right now, in particularly in the UK. Your flagship circ £6500 bike currently appears to be the lightest most capable gravity enduro bike and for some crazy reason you are offering the bottom of the range alloy versions in coil and air sprung, but not the flagship model - what is the logic behind that? I wanted to buy the top of the line version or at least the carbon frameset, both being sold all over the world, but NOT the UK????
After a bit of calling around I finnally found out through a concept store that Spesh UK were taking "unofficially" 20 frames into the UK. What the hell is "unofficailly". I jumped at the opportunity. When it came to placing the deposit by phone. I was told. That will be 20% deposit, the frames are due in March (this was Dec) so 20% of £2600 (frame only) then a voice in the background said something and the lad said, "my mistake 20% of £3000. Me: WHAT? £3K for the frame only?? Its only a carbon front end. Its still an alloy back end with Cane Creek air, that's the most expensive enduro frame by a long shot - no thanks. "
Sorry for the rant lads ;-)
I guess when you need to keep the test bikes coming, you'll give a handy to just about anyone, right?
GD
Their bikes are a completely different suspension design. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Lenz Utilizes a linkage driven single pivot design which is much closer to what Kona uses than Specialzied.
Last time I checked...a wheel diameter and the geometry of a frame were not patentable items.
Yeah, sounds legit, because law of physics do not apply to 29" wheels. It can absorbs free and magical energy from the air, and automatically output more power than what you put into the pedals.
People used to think 29er have lower rolling resistance over rocks and roots. But this proves that 29ers just pick up speed through divine intervention.
Rolling resistance difference is also very small. Tire choice is by far more important.
What IS different is biomechanical comfort when pedaling over obstacles. Less spikes in resistance. It is real, and it is much more noticeable on hardtails. What is even more important is bike fit and stability. Trail and CG in relation to wheel axles.
Larger wheels have distinct advantages. Up to a point. And you can not get around the fact that weight increases linearly and stiffness decreases as cube of wheel radius/frame dimensions.
This is the only thing that I really wrestle with with 9'er and the overall fit of course. I never cared for 9'ers in the past, but now they are made to be more maneuverable, more travel, slacker, more DH friendly while still very pedable, that I am starting to become intrigued. The main drawback for me is the potential for loss of stiffness in the wheel as stated above since I already have to run straight gauge spokes, wider/stout rims, thicker tire sidewalls and higher tire pressures on my trail bike in effort to minimize any extra wheel flex when ridden hard. One of my pet peeves on a bike, outside of frame flex and pivot play of course
I would suggest the author do some research on geometry. The wandering front end on climbs is less a result of the height of the front end, and more directly related to the slack head anngle and the resultantly extra lengthy trail number. Trail has a huge impact on steering feel, and a slack head angle lengthens trail on a 29er more than on a 26er. Unfortunatly, people buying the bike will have a hard time wrapping their head around the idea that the bike might be more effective with a 68 or 68.5 deg HA, as 66 and 67 are the buzz numbers now. Those numbers result in the feel the author describes.
good review, and detailed balance of good/bad points
I am rocking a Stumpy 29'er and could not be happier with its performance?
especially on the DH where many commented I would be slower, but a skilled rider on a 29'er is actually picking up 'free' momentum (the inertia effect of 29er wheels) and then more concerned about being able to slow down, than worrying about the bigger wheels holding you back...
good points you raise. It does take some time and adjustment to get the most from a 29'er
it was the same issue when front suspension forks, and then when full suspension bikes were introduced. I was there during those early years (we started with fully rigid bikes), and remember first with the suspension forks, and later with the full suspension, going MUCH quicker into corners and over rough terrain, and having to adapt and learn how to get the most from the new technology
I have found the same aspect with using a well designed 29'er; for a skilled rider there is at first a learning curve, and then a serious speed advantage both on flatter terrain and also technical terrain (which surprised me).
a big problem for many riders "trying" or "testing" a 29'er is that they don't have this time to adapt, and perhaps 'write off' the merits of the bigger wheel? when the simple truth is that you cannot ride a 29'er like a 26" and expect the same results?
it takes time to learn how to get the most from a 29'er, just like suspension systems.
something I have found is rolling speed is much higher whether going up(climb), along(singletrack) or downhill, and wheel grip is much higher, especially on loose surface on flat corners. Learning how to keep those bigger wheels rolling (flow), and deal with the higher speeds you are rolling at, takes some time
I would only buy another 26" bike for serious DH or FR (Specialized Demo 8 for example)
I remember my first thoughts after rallying a 29er for the first time, "Man...that was different and I don't quite have it dialed, but man, if I figure this out it's got incredible potential."
I believe those who despise 29ers fall into one or more of a few relativley easily definable categories.
1. They have never ridden one and think riding a 29er somehow diminishes your shred factor. (DH Grom Mentality)
2. They have ridden one and dismissed it immediatley because it felt different and did not immediatley make them faster. (Caveman Mentality)
3. They have ridden one and don't have the skill set to understand what is actually happening underneath them and appreciate the potential. (Squid Mentality)
4. They are very short. (Napolean Complex)
I feel bad for the Groms, Cavemen, Squids, & Napoleans out there...b/c in the right hands, a 29er can rip.
good points.
my buddy has tried my 29'er a couple of times and can see the potential, last time he rode it he said "it just picks up speed going down the hill!"
a problem is that he is a little taller than me and has large feet for his height, my 17.5" Stumpy is giving him toe overlap issues when he should be riding 18/19" frame with longer front centre
trying to get him onto 29'er because he is a serious rider with a number of bikes in his stable, I know he would love the 29er as a winter trail bike
Come on man...my well though out categorization of 29er haters is not only logical...and probably true...but also funny.....and probably true.
Did I mention it's probably pretty accurate?
You call people illiterate 5th graders and yet your post has grammatical errors( though instead of thought).
You claim it's logical but that means what exactly? Is it valid? Maybe . Cogent? Not really.
Calling me names( Saidrock), well refer back to the 5th grader comment.
spokemagazine.com/2012/11/30/wheel-war-four
You've probably been around long enough that you remember when suspension forks and then full suspension bikes hit the market. This all has a very similar feel to me. People who are adverse to change digging their heels in the ground and making declaratory statements about things they believe they know to be absolute.
I think it can only be good though. Companies and engineers pushing the limits of what can be done with bike design, materials, wheel size, and geometry can only be good for us all.
I just have a hard time not laughing at the people who declare in absolute terms that 29ers are garbage, with no real reasoning.
gettin older, i do have less time to ride and even less time to decide. so, i just run what i brung. haha. the opposing views and opinions you listed make sense but those are the ones you can't live without to go forward with anything. i'm always down for progression of riding for mtb, bmx, & moto. i enjoy watching you younguns sending as much as watching me and my old crew fredding a simple gap or step down! haha. ride on!
First off, I have nothing against any wheel size, and this is the first time I've ever commented on anything on PB. In my opinion, he kind of answered his own question about whether or not we need 650b. If the 29er handled well, yet you wouldn't trade your 26" Enduro because you prefer the immediacy of the smaller wheels, isn't that the spot where the 650B would fit nicely? Some of the great points of the 29er with a lot more of the "immediacy" of the 26" that 29" can't match. If the 29er Enduro handles so surprisingly, wouldn't a 650b version be even more impressive in a bike that is designed to be an aggressive handler? Maybe if there ever was a 650b Enduro to test it would bring to light that point exactly. That's what a lot of the companies going 650b realized. Riders who like aggressive trail/AM riding want the snappiness of 26" but could benefit from bigger wheel advantages can find a happy home with 650b. Like another earlier comment said as well, they would be able to accomodate smaller riders and be able to sell frames in a full range, not just M, L, XL.
"Remember that Specialized got caught with its pants down, and didn't think the market was going to accept 650b."
not at all, they stood back and spent their time researching and riding the different wheel sizes. A company that large (and successful) does not continue to achieve good sales by making snap decisions on new trends in the market?
The companies that got caught napping were the companies who did not embrace the big 29" wheel and found themselves marginalized whilst Specialized, Trek, Giant, etc. reaped the sales benefit of the 29'er movements (despite not being "early adopters" like some of the 29er pioneers)
something to remember that is whilst the average Pinkbike member is a hardcore biker, the mass market (where companies make their money) has found the 29er a very favourable solution for recreational trail riding (that is what most "mountain bikers" are doing, not FR, DH or Dirt Jump)
what is happening if you look closely is that these smaller companies have embraced 650B to create a unique selling point in an overcrowded market, where the big companies are doing VERY good business with 29'er bikes (although ROAD bikes are a much bigger market for these companies...)
I've ridden all 3 sizes and found 26" and 650B too close to be markedly different, whereas 29'er is markedly different to 26" to justify a different wheel size for the mountain bike market
They have two choices, scrap the last couple years of development and bring out 650b models, or market what they have and use their clout in the industry to push through while they fasttrack 650b models. They definitely won't mention a 650b enduro as a mid year release, as they need to market this model for the forseeable future. What are they supposed to say? This bike is REALLY good, but we think we could do better with a 650b. Spend 9k on this one and trade it in when we get the next one ready..
Dirt magazine have done a brilliant job seeking out and championing great bikes like the YT Tues (/2.0) which I could conceivably buy. Better yet with the money I save I could afford to visit new places that would push my riding far more than a 100% carbon super bike.
Nothing better to do. I'll forwrd this to your boss...
GD
that said, if it rides as good as the numbers suggest, this kills the argument for 650b.
If it addresses all of the issues raised in the review, yet has better roll over and traction than 26", then it still has merit, no?
This 29" Enduro in XL actually has a shorter wheelbase than my XL Enduro from 2010 and I haven't had any issue climbing or descending pretty much every trail on the Shore so stop whining. These bikes also have some of the steepest seat tubes available, again, great for taller riders.
If you've got a problem with the 34mm stanchions maybe you should take it up with Fox. It's not like there are any other options. I haven't ridden one extensively yet, but many people are saying that today's 34 is equivalent in stiffness to 36s past due to improvements in design, especially given the different physics of the 29" wheel.
I'm sorry, what were you complaining about?
Check out this video, which I believe contains the new RS 29er fork:
www.vitalmtb.com/videos/features/Specialized-S-Works-Enduro-29-Trail-Battles-Lets-Make-It-Interesting,19866/sspomer,2
I can't tell exactly if it's 34mm, but it doesn't look much bigger than the Fox 34. If this is the fork we've been waiting for then prepare to be underwhelmed. I would love for the RS fork to be a bit burlier than the Fox, if only to create another option.
Apparently the RS fork is a Lyrik 29 which I would buy in a heartbeat. Waiting for the Nomad 29 though!
Do you think that's a Lyrik?
Innovative engineering that pushes through industry convention is not marketing hype. Engineering your products to meet an evolving market and technology is not marketing hype. Plus, take a look at the article on VitalMTB. A faster bike designed to meet a growing - and really cool - racing format is not hype.
My kid's 24" bike rolls when you spin the cranks, and I could probably use it to ride a trail. Joke's on me I guess. I actually bought into the hype and spent more money to by a bike with 26" wheels.
That is not true, because the wheel rotates. The wheel hits a bump and compresses, but it doesn't return until after the bump event. Its just like having a more raked out front end (or shallower head tube angle, to be more precise). When the shock is rebounding, it does so because the back side of the bump is there, and there is no more compression on the shock. The is no extra drag because the wheel rolls down the back side.
So you might be right after all......I am not sure if this minimal gain would be noticeable in a real world situation tough. I would love to learn more on the subject.
Cheers
Sorry for making fun of you :p, it's cool you think about these things. If you like these kind of things you should really check out the free demo of Linkage, on bikechecker.com. It's suspension analysis software with a massive database of mountain bikes (click web library when opening) that lets you compare things like axle path, anti-squat curves, pedal-kickback, leverage ratio, all you want. The manual explains all.
Now if the rear wheel weighed literally a ton, yes the frame would move forward on hitting a bump, and move backwards on the backside. But no matter what the rebound damping, the ton of rear wheel would just pull the frame backwards after the bump, not the frame pulling a ton forwards.
Bottom line: as long as no energy is put into the system that is the bike (frame+wheels+suspension), it cannot possibly propel itself.
We are not talking about gaining speed bouncing the bike up and down. we are talking about a bike rolling over a bump. Obviously you did not consider the friction forces acting on your tires in you assertion.
Obviously if the wheelbase will extend it will push the bike forward.....the rear wheel cannot go backwards on a bike without backpedaling (the chain links the wheel to the crankset).......unless the tire would lock up and skid which we know is not the case while riding.
So yes you can assume that the rear wheel is fixed and the bike is moving through the front wheel. Which means that the front wheel will be moving towards the back of the bike on the rebound. You also forgot to take into consideration the "rider pedaling" scenario. Obviously the rear wheel is not going to move backwards.
To add to your post, even in the linkage software the rear wheel is fixed and the front wheel extends on rear shock compression.
Perhaps this subject is a little bit above your head.
We are not talking about a bike accelerating, but about a bike having less deceleration with a rearward wheel path.....I think that was clear for everyone.
You might want to review your physics before posting that gibberish.
I was not talking about gaining speed bouncing the bike up and down (rider input), I was talking about a bike rolling over a bump (which is actually the same for the rear suspension (reference frames), just different angle at which forces attack the rear wheel). 'Obviously' you are oblivious to the difference between static friction and rolling friction. 'Obviously' your assertions did not consider how insignificant rolling resistances between road and tire, and between axle and hub are.
Quote: "Obviously if the wheelbase will extend it will push the bike forward"; yes, 'obviously', call NASA!
Obviously, considering the scenario of a rider pedaling is useless since that is rider input and it should be rather obvious that rider input can be used to give a net propulsion forward.
Obviously you did not see the checkbox named "Horizontal mode" in the Linkage software, and 'obviously' do not understand the concept of reference frames (seriously tho, this is where you go completely awry).
But most obvious of all is that you have no need or want for my help, so I'm out and good luck to you. And then I will go straight back to all my mechanical engineering books, and Tony Foale's and Vittore Cossalter's books, cus this is all over my head and I need to review physics and I'm talking gibberisch lol :p
ps. best circumlocutory description of pedal-kickback ever
I know exactly what a reference frame is, what i was describing earlier was a bike tracking the ground. The only way your previous physics would be applicable is for a bike taking of a jump and the rebound stroke is with the bike in mid air. Your reference frame is a bike floating in mid air. ( horizontal mode in linkage does not apply to bike on the ground and only reflects a bike floating )
It is nice to see that you have changed your position on wether the front wheel would travel forward on compression. You were saying earlier that it was the rear wheel moving out of the way. Either that or you are contracting yourself.
The scenario of a rider pedalling is totally relevant since it is a bicycle and that is what it is intended to do. I was trying to explain that when pedalling, the pedal kick back will not be strong enough to back pedal the bike. Instead the suspension would be stiffening up due to the chain growth. Therefore the rear wheel cannot rotate backwards.
You did not explain how I was wrong in your last post.....and i still don't understand where you stand on the rear axle path....what are you trying to say?
Its easy to throw fancy words around.....but you should be cautious about their meaning.
I def think that those mechanical engineering books are too advanced for this topic, we are talking high school material here. You should understand the basic statics and dynamics before moving on to the deeper stuff.
I loled hard at this!!!!!!!
29ers carry a noticeable amount of extra weight in there wheels which is a big drag on punchy techy trails, are floppier, but some do corner nice.
Tho I'm sure a carbon wonder bike would solve most of it. But at 6'3" and over 200lb i enjoy the manhandling aspect of mountain biking the most, and wont give that up for any strava time whoring.
Also.
You'll have to pry my burly 6" 20mm axle fork from my cold dead hands!
I guess I am more "pedally - lite freeride" then "enduro". I want stuff I can do 10-15 foot drops with, bash around and generally ride like a dh bike and climb technical weirdness. And I want to get 3-4 years out of it. I'm happy with low 30lb bikes, balancing minimal wheel weight with strength is big for me/ my trails. Bigger wheels will only add weight and reduce strength.
I enjoyed the 29er added smoothness, felt they handled fine in the bends, but the less snappy acceleration was a big negative for me. And the ones I've tried were flexy at over 7/10ths type riding. I'm sure Sworks amount of money fixes most of that, but why spend money for unwanted gain. I have lots of interests and think 4-5 grand is "enough" for a bike unless I start making big big bucks some day.
I do plan on a 29er hard tail tho. Probably steel rigid xc bike. I am no dead set against different wheel sizes per say, but numbness and lack of rigidity will not be accepted in my 6" bikes. Sorta like with cars, I guess I'd rather drive a slow car fast then a fast car slow.. (enough rambling for now.)
I had a small Nomad before and I don't miss it (rode it 4 years). If you can try, go for it. This Enduro looks great. Longer TT, Higher Stand Over Height and longer WB. Nowadays, you can't really go wrong with any bike...
The only hard task is choosing...
Hasn't Intense had a 150-mm Tracer 29er for a few years now?
That's like giving a shock a "Bad" rating because the rebound was too fast when the rebound dial was turned to "Fast".
But another bike we wont see in uk why not just go 650b ??
if Specialized could set me up with one of these for a week i could find its weakness(es). i dbout the review would come in nearly as fawning as this one was.
Time to go with dual crown 29er forks i guess... but then. . . what do you do with big travel. Personally I go down hills FAST, and find the biggest jumps I can find.
you dont want to hit technical sections fast with a 29er. Fork flex? maybe not so much with 34mm stanchions, but wider tires also means more rotational mass, thus creating greater under steer. (just remembered the tubeless carbon rims) maybe not.(thought I was on to something...)
Fantastic build build by the way, but I would still take the 26er.
Doesn't seem to me that the 26 is dead and buried just yet.
midlife crisis galore
You know, nobody's mentioned this year, but last fall Aaron Gwinn was testing the new Trek 650B DH bike and apparently enjoying it, then the team jump to Specialized happened and conveniently they already had this Enduro 29er in development. Anyone want to place bets on us seeing Aaron riding megavalanche on this thing ?
And yes Trek and Specialized do make high end bikes, but they do not make all the high end bikes.
I think other companies will follow Ibis and make their bikes 26"/ 650B compatible.
Why would a bike company want to alienate a buying demographic?
a href=" www.bicycle-talran.co.il/?cat=15" >אופני הרים /a>
I think I would still rather keep my 26". I know three people who ride 29er's and all the rest of my mountain biking friends (probably about 7-10 of them locally) all prefer 26.
I'd be interested to see how it performs on the enduro circuit. I can't see it being all that maneuverable.
But first I would like to try it out as is, looks like it might be fun to plow through stuff on the big wheels.
Are you using that new math I've heard about?
reviews.mtbr.com/26er-or-29er-which-was-faster-at-the-24-hours-in-the-old-pueblo
Probably
well now to try it for myself
Even Kona makes some xxls! Get with the program, big red!
This is a ridiculously ugly overdesigned piece of generic taiwan carbon c%ç/.
Technically: 69 degree headangle and cartwheels make this a pig to ride by any standards. And in 2014 will look even more outdated. Spec really lost the plot.
In some area 10k is what the whole house cost, in some areas 10k is not even close to a down payment, some areas 10k is not even one monthly payment.
Some people think $100.00 is alot to pay for a new mountain bike for instance yet spend $5000 for a watch or a designer purse.
Long live the 26er!