# When will a 29er fit in here?



## TheSingleGuy (Mar 11, 2004)

That is, when do the VRC illuminati think a 29er will be VRC, if ever? 

I know we're only approaching ten years of 29er-ism, but as a fan-boi (who also loves old bikes) I feel compelled to ask. The V bit will take a long time, there are a few that are already kinda R-styled, but what about the C? The KM certainly was a game-changer, IMO. Loved that bike. I don't think I'm alone in calling it a bit of a classic, but it's faded into the background in recent years.

Is this something y'all wanna disquss?


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

I'm pretty sure Willits has been building them for a bit longer than 10 years. If you really want to go back to the origins of the movement.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Willits and Bruce Gordons belong here, in my opinion.

Feel free to disagree, but 29ers aren't nearly as fun as 26ers, in my opinion.


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

Not an "illuminati" of the vintage, retro, or classic here, but I'll give ya my two cents...

1999 is when modern day 29"ers first happened. Not before that. This was when the Nanoraptor came out, and no tire with a 622ISO bead diameter had been made that big before for modern era mountain bikes. So- you start there with your 29 inch wheeled VRC pickins...

Most of what I would call possibilities for inclusion here would be custom/small builders like early Willits, ('99), early Moots ('99), the prototype Fishers made by Steve Potts, ('99-2001), and there may be a few others. (Hunter comes to mind immediately.)

Certainly, some day the Supercal in 2001 will be a collector, and probably Campstove Green Karate Monkeys, but that's a long shot. (First KM's were Campstove green in '03)

Otherwise I think we need to wait about 10 more years.


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

1993 Diamondback Overdrive? If you posted a nicely built one in here right now, you wouldn't get run out of the joint. 
GT Tachyons from that era get posted on here from time to time, too.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Those carbon-fiber Fishers are going to be classics. That 29" that Steve Potts showed off at the NAHBS is beautiful, as are most Black Cats that I've seen.


----------



## TheSingleGuy (Mar 11, 2004)

Guitar Ted said:


> about 10 more years.


Thanks GT and all. Didn't mean to start another "when were 29ers first made?" thread, I've read most of the other ones.

My KM was the campstove green one. Cool bike. I agree about the Willits, Potts etc deserve their place. As do Retrotecs, I think, for their styling, at the very least.

I wonder if this forum will be around long enough for us to discuss it again in those ten years, GT?


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

TheSingleGuy said:


> Thanks GT and all. Didn't mean to start another "when were 29ers first made?" thread, I've read most of the other ones.


Yeah, I don't mean to start anything up either, but lots of folks confuse rim size with outer wheel diameter. It is the latter that makes a bike a 29"er, or not. 



> My KM was the campstove green one. Cool bike. I agree about the Willits, Potts etc deserve their place. As do Retrotecs, I think, for their styling, at the very least.


I figure that even though a bunch of Karate Monkeys are out there, the first year KM's should be considered as they set the standard for geometry early on, were copied, (as far as aforementioned geometry), the most by custom guys and many bigger companies, and were the first affordable option for a 29"er out there. Definitely a "classic" example of a 29"er.



> I wonder if this forum will be around long enough for us to discuss it again in those ten years, GT?


We'll probably check in here as long as they keep the lights on in this place, but who knows what the future will bring?


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

I remember being at Chuck's shop in San Diego in 1999 and having him show me his new bikes from those guys who are changing things in Colorado. Who would have known...


----------



## FairfaxPat (Jan 29, 2008)

A pic from a few years back of myself and CC and his personal bike, a half 29er!


----------



## iheartbicycles (Mar 14, 2008)

TheSingleGuy said:


> That is, when do the VRC illuminati think a 29er will be VRC, if ever?
> 
> I know we're only approaching ten years of 29er-ism, but as a fan-boi (who also loves old bikes) I feel compelled to ask. The V bit will take a long time, there are a few that are already kinda R-styled, but what about the C? The KM certainly was a game-changer, IMO. Loved that bike. I don't think I'm alone in calling it a bit of a classic, but it's faded into the background in recent years.
> 
> Is this something y'all wanna disquss?


Whoevers got the original 29'er WTB Phoenix's from 1999 could qualify. I sold one to Doug White and one to Tony at Chicago bikes. I might call and see if they still have them.


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

Guitar Ted said:


> Yeah, I don't mean to start anything up either, but lots of folks confuse rim size with outer wheel diameter. It is the latter that makes a bike a 29"er, or not.


Seriously? Yes, the 29" term refers to the idea of a 29" outside tire diameter, but to argue that a bike that measures something like 28.2" outside tire diameter is not a "29er" is to indicate brain damage.


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

As far a "retro" and "classic" I think there are plenty of 29ers that fit into that category. A lot of the bikes at the NAHBS bike show fit those categories.

It may be a while before many 29er become vintage though. The early 700c bikes from Diamond Back and Bianchi probably already qualify. The "new" 700c bikes that claim the 29er designation may take a while. Part of being "vintage" (in my opinion) is that current standards have changed since the bike was built. Bikes built for 0-50mm of front fork travel, frames with u-brake mounts, 1" inch head tubes, etc., these make a bike vintage. The problem with designating a late 90's frame as "vintage" is that it's no different from a frame made today - other than it's older.


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

Xizang11 said:


> Seriously? Yes, the 29" term refers to the idea of a 29" outside tire diameter, but to argue that a bike that measures something like 28.2" outside tire diameter is not a "29er" is to indicate brain damage.


Last time I checked, my measuring tools show 28.2" as being shorter than a reading of 29 inches. YMMV. 

The point I am making is that previous to the Nanoraptor, there was no tire available that made the outer diameter of a wheel, (in this case, 700c rim + tire), measure 29 inches.

Even Wes Williams was calling his Conti Goliath equipped mountain bikes "28"ers" previous to the Nano, and that tire, at 47mm wide, was the largest 700c based tire he could find previous to 1999.

So, unless the bike came with a Nanoraptor, (which couldn't have happened before 1999), it wasn't a 29"er. This was common knowledge at the time amongst the folks involved with bringing the 700c mountain bike into a place where it could finally realize its potential.

700c based mountain bikes certainly existed previous to 29"ers, but that isn't what is being discussed here.


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

laffeaux said:


> As far a "retro" and "classic" I think there are plenty of 29ers that fit into that category. A lot of the bikes at the NAHBS bike show fit those categories.
> 
> It may be a while before many 29er become vintage though. The early 700c bikes from Diamond Back and Bianchi probably already qualify. The "new" 700c bikes that claim the 29er designation may take a while. Part of being "vintage" (in my opinion) is that current standards have changed since the bike was built. Bikes built for 0-50mm of front fork travel, frames with u-brake mounts, 1" inch head tubes, etc., these make a bike vintage. The problem with designating a late 90's frame as "vintage" is that it's no different from a frame made today - other than it's older.


But.....at some point 29"ers, (at least the early ones), will be vintage. Just like the first modern day mountain bikes. That's what is the question: When will that happen? I think it will take awhile.


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

Guitar Ted said:


> But.....at some point 29"ers, (at least the early ones), will be vintage. Just like the first modern day mountain bikes. That's what is the question: When will that happen? I think it will take awhile.


When BB shells on new bikes longer come in 68 or 73mm, or head tubes in 1-1/8", or when you're looking for parts for you're bike on eBay because the LBS no longer sells what you need. How ever long that is. 

I think the point on the 700c versus 29er, is mare analogous to the fact that a mountain bike with 1.9 or 3.5 inch tires on a 26" rim is still called a 26er. No one calls them 25ers or 27er based on what tire is installed. In the end 29ers are 700c bikes. Early 700c bikes suffered from narrow tires. When wide tires were available they became popular.


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

laffeaux said:


> In the end 29ers are 700c bikes.


Right. I agree.



> Early 700c bikes suffered from narrow tires. When wide tires were available they became popular.


As mountain bikes, yes, they did. That's why the 29"er tire makes them work, and why the early guys wanted that big, voluminous tire, just like the early mtb pioneers wanted a big, voluminous tire for off roading. Mountain biking, such as it was/is, wouldn't work as well as it does without such tires. It is what makes our bikes unique, wouldn't you agree?

If so, then it makes sense to call that bike with a bigger tire something different, which is where the terms for 26"ers arose from to describe their use. (And keep in mind, the 26 inch tire wasn't a slam dunk for the early bikes either. Other solutions/sizes were sought out.)

The 29"er is different than a "700c bike" for the same reasons, I would argue, but to each their own.


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

Guitar Ted said:


> Last time I checked, my measuring tools show 28.2" as being shorter than a reading of 29 inches. YMMV.
> 
> The point I am making is that previous to the Nanoraptor, there was no tire available that made the outer diameter of a wheel, (in this case, 700c rim + tire), measure 29 inches.
> 
> ...


Prior to 1999 it was common knowledge to those of us questing to create the 29er that we had not yet created the 29er, but we were close! Some day we would create the 29er, and worldwide, the leprechauns would jump up and down and sing our praises!

I'm glad you're so beholden to your specific definition GT. More power to you. But when I see an old 700c mountain bike, I'm going to keep on calling it a 29er.

Sorry if that hurts your feelings.


----------



## halaburt (Jan 13, 2004)

Guitar Ted said:


> ...So, unless the bike came with a Nanoraptor, (which couldn't have happened before 1999), it wasn't a 29"er. This was common knowledge at the time amongst the folks involved with bringing the 700c mountain bike into a place where it could finally realize its potential...


So your BMC bike, which will hold a 29" Nanoraptor, is therefore a "29'er MTB"? Or is it a "monstercross"? If I put 1" FatBoys on my 26" MTB, does it become a "road bike"? If I put Panaracer FireCross 45's on my Niner Air-9 does it cease to be a "29'er MTB"?

My point: Tires and their size is important and certainly changes how a bike rides and what you can do on it. But it's not the only thing. Lots of shades of grey.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Guitar Ted said:


> Last time I checked, my measuring tools show 28.2" as being shorter than a reading of 29 inches. YMMV.


Mmmm, gonna have to disagree here.

My Fatbike has a 26" wheel and a 4.7" tire, which exceed 29" in outer diameter, so what are they?

My 700C mtb wheels with a 1.25 slick are smaller than 29", yet slap a meaty 2.4 on, and they exceed 29"

What the hell do I do? Measure tire height after each swap so I can tell folks whether I'm riding the 28 3/4er or the 29 3/8 er?


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

Is there a direct line from the folks/companies doing 700c mtn bike back in the early 90s and the intro of 'the tire'? And then the eventual increase in popularity in the 29er?


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

I disagree Jill338, I actually like big wheel bikes, both 29er and 650b. As tall as I am, I feel like I'm on a clown bike when I ride a 26er these days.


----------



## TheSingleGuy (Mar 11, 2004)

*sigh...*

Thanks for all the tangents to those who need to argue what a 29er is _again_...

Laffeaux, interesting, I hadn't thought of vintage in that way - when standards have moved on (and scrounging begins). I know this place, howeever... 

(some of these photos have been seen here before).

So I guess the Rs and the Cs may be around today, but the Vs will take another ten years or more. Cool.

Thanks for the input all.

cjm


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

August '99, #1










fiveandaquarter


----------



## iheartbicycles (Mar 14, 2008)

Fillet-brazed said:


> August '99, #1
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That must have been the one built for interbike. They never sold the Ti 29'er's retail. They only sold chromo. this is totally a one of a kind.

Who owns this bike?

BTW - notice the fork. There was no such thing as a Z2 29'er. This fork was cut and extended by the WTB guys. 1" inserts were press fit into the outer legs to extend the fork.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

iheartbicycles said:


> That must have been the one built for interbike. They never sold the Ti 29'er's retail. They only sold chromo. this is totally a one of a kind.
> 
> Who owns this bike?
> 
> BTW - notice the fork. There was no such thing as a Z2 29'er. This fork was cut and extended by the WTB guys. 1" inserts were press fit into the outer legs to extend the fork.


lay off the meds dood

click the link

I remember harassing you about the steel ones a few years ago, still haven't found one..


----------



## iheartbicycles (Mar 14, 2008)

hollister said:


> lay off the meds dood
> 
> click the link
> 
> I remember harassing you about the steel ones a few years ago, still haven't found one..


Start with either Doug White or Tony from Chicago Bike. Not sure is Chicago Bike is still in business, though. I googled and couldnt find him.

So who one's the Ti Phoenix 9'er?

Anyone got a line on the 2 made for GF? These were not Phoenix's - they were Gary's spec. Curved seat tubs, and no chainstay brace, if i remember correct. He raced them that year, painted to look like a GF/Subaru team bike.

And now that I think about it, they must have done the same mods to a couple Manitous that they did to the Marzocchi- cause I'm pretty sure they had red manitou mach 5's on them.

-edit- found a pic


----------



## iheartbicycles (Mar 14, 2008)

hollister said:


> lay off the meds dood
> 
> click the link
> 
> I remember harassing you about the steel ones a few years ago, still haven't found one..


On the phone with Doug White right now asking about his bike.

-edit- he still has it and is going to send pics later today.

candy apple red!


----------



## iheartbicycles (Mar 14, 2008)

iheartbicycles said:


> On the phone with Doug White right now asking about his bike.
> 
> -edit- he still has it and is going to send pics later today.
> 
> candy apple red!


One the phone with Tony now, asking about his 1999 Phoenix 29'er. If I remember right, this one is black.

-edit - not in yet. will try later.


----------



## prefixie (Apr 11, 2012)

Didn't klein make a 700c hybrid mountain bike thing? Could/would that be considered a 29er?


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

iheartbicycles said:


> Start with either Doug White or Tony from Chicago Bike. Not sure is Chicago Bike is still in business, though. I googled and couldnt find him.
> 
> So who one's the Ti Phoenix 9'er?
> 
> ...


Zapata Espinoza...


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

This topic is interesting but I still cringe when I see v brakes.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

prefixie said:


> Didn't klein make a 700c hybrid mountain bike thing? Could/would that be considered a 29er?


A 29er is a mountain bike. What makes a bike a mountain bike? I would say at a minimum it would be 1.95" tires...


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

iheartbicycles said:


> That must have been the one built for interbike. They never sold the Ti 29'er's retail. They only sold chromo. this is totally a one of a kind.
> 
> Who owns this bike?
> 
> BTW - notice the fork. There was no such thing as a Z2 29'er. This fork was cut and extended by the WTB guys. 1" inserts were press fit into the outer legs to extend the fork.


Yes, this was the one at Interbike in 1999. Steve machined 30mm extenders for the fork to allow the big wheel. I have another Marzocchi (later model with the one-piece lowers and arch) that Steve also lengthened. He also modified the lower headset cup (more stack height) and rolled the Speed Master rim extrusion to the 700c size. One of a kind for sure.


----------



## iheartbicycles (Mar 14, 2008)

Fillet-brazed said:


> Yes, this was the one at Interbike in 1999. Steve machined 30mm extenders for the fork to allow the big wheel. I have another Marzocchi (later model with the one-piece lowers and arch) that Steve also lengthened. He also modified the lower headset cup (more stack height) and rolled the Speed Master rim extrusion to the 700c size. One of a kind for sure.


if I remember right, the speedmasters were stock. These were off the shelf items and being used on many different bikes at the time. Charlie had a 69'er phoenix, mark had a 29'er, chromo - these all used the speedmasters.

is this your bike?


----------



## even (Dec 13, 2010)

My FTW?


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

halaburt said:


> So your BMC bike, which will hold a 29" Nanoraptor, is therefore a "29'er MTB"? Or is it a "monstercross"? If I put 1" FatBoys on my 26" MTB, does it become a "road bike"? If I put Panaracer FireCross 45's on my Niner Air-9 does it cease to be a "29'er MTB"?
> 
> My point: Tires and their size is important and certainly changes how a bike rides and what you can do on it. But it's not the only thing. Lots of shades of grey.


This has nothing to do with "when will a 29"er fit in this forum", and is not really pertinent to my point, which is that there wasn't a possibility for a 29"er as we know it to be commonly described, ( tire with big enough volume on a 700c rim to make the outer diameter 29"), before 1999.

What "shades of grey" there are today is an entirely different discussion.



> *Originally posted by MendonCycleSmith:* Mmmm, gonna have to disagree here.
> 
> My Fatbike has a 26" wheel and a 4.7" tire, which exceed 29" in outer diameter, so what are they?
> 
> ...


I think you are taking this out of the original context. Try and see it from the viewpoint of '98-'99.

Again- the point is that as far as "vintage, retro, and classic" are concerned, any example of what is most commonly referred to as a "29"er" didn't exist before 1999. What comes after can be argued, discussed, and decided upon by others. (I would argue that none of your examples are "vintage, classic, or retro"......yet) Some great examples of bikes are being posted that might fit the original question here.

That's as simple as I can make it. Call it what you want if you feel I am wrong.


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

Guitar Ted said:


> This has nothing to do with "when will a 29"er fit in this forum", and is not really pertinent to my point, which is that there wasn't a possibility for a 29"er as we know it to be commonly described, ( tire with big enough volume on a 700c rim to make the outer diameter 29"), before 1999.
> 
> What "shades of grey" there are today is an entirely different discussion.
> 
> ...


I suppose your mistake was bringing a topic that you feel "begins" in 1999 to a forum where very few of the regulars give much thought to anything that was built after 1993....

The frame of reference for 29ers around here IS the smattering of 700c mountain bikes that you seem to find so offensive to your special inch category.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

Xizang11 said:


> The frame of reference for 29ers around here IS the smattering of 700c mountain bikes that you seem to find so offensive to your special inch category.


No, those were not 29ers then nor now... not by name, not by measurement, not by intent.


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

Fillet-brazed said:


> No, those were not 29ers then nor now... not by name, not by measurement, not by intent.


I was unaware that 29ers had special intent. I thought they were intended to be mountain bikes. Which brings me to the greater question --not "when will 29ers be VRC?" but "when will 29ers just be mountain bikes?"

I remember similar divisions of the mountain biking community when suspension forks vs. rigid was at the forefront of technology, then when hardtails vs. full suspension was the topic of the day, but neither of these issues seemed to just linger like the wheel size debate has.
It's been what, 13 years since this special 29er tire came about? Why are there still forums dedicated to a wheel size? Why does every forum have a raging debate about the topic?

I have plenty of friends who ride each wheel size, many ride both....I have a bunch of bikes, but none are newer than 1996 models (all 26"). IF I get a new bike, I can't imagine NOT test riding bikes with both wheel sizes before I make a purchase. I'm decidedly not anti-29er. I AM however anti the stupid argument that if somebody puts narrower tires on a 29er it stops being a 29er.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

Xizang11 said:


> I AM however anti the stupid argument that if somebody puts narrower tires on a 29er it stops being a 29er.


sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken

meditate on that


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

hollister said:


> sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken
> 
> meditate on that


It's so difficult to meditate with the feathers in there........


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

hollister said:


> sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken
> 
> meditate on that


Now that's funny! 

GT, I was addressing your quote, "Last time I checked, my measuring tools show 28.2" as being shorter than a reading of 29 inches. YMMV."

Unless you were referring to some specific tire/rim combo that was pre 1999, and that exact size, I took your meaning to be rather snarky, as if something less (or more) in dimensionality than exactly 29" could not by definition, be a 29er.

If you had a deeper meaning, I missed it....

Yes, the Bianchi and GT 700C/D offerings weren't 29ers in the modern sense, nor were they called such. But they were wagon wheeled bikes that some folks likely rode, off road, and likely, smiled while doing it, so were they enjoying a 29er without realizing it? Yes, if you ask me. 

I also find it amusing/interesting that the rancor over 29 vs 26 so common on the 29er board, easily spills over into a discussion about vintage bikes.

As for the original question, I'd say give it a few more years. The one thing 29 does have going for it for this crowd is, they pushed FS riders back onto hardtails, hardtail riders to try rigid, and geared riders to throw a leg over a SS for the first time.

Now if we could just get them to start slapping cantis on, I think the whole crowd here would get all mushy and misty eyed.


----------



## MABman (Oct 5, 2008)

The which came first thing has been beaten to death on the internet but the early 29"ers had elements of the 26" mtb's of that era and even further back that had paved the way and it is hard to dispute that.

















































And at dirt demo in 99' Tom Rogers had that Manitou fork shown on the Fisher hanging out of his backpack. The red brother to it is hanging on the wall. The early 90's Manitous as seen were bought on closeout in 99' for $15 a copy. The one on the DB is still in use today.

BTW all the above bikes except for the silver one were alive in 99'. It came along in 2000 but still used an early 90's extended Girven fork.


----------



## iheartbicycles (Mar 14, 2008)

MABman said:


> The which came first thing has been beaten to death on the internet but the early 29"ers had elements of the 26" mtb's of that era and even further back that had paved the way and it is hard to dispute that.
> 
> View attachment 706551
> 
> ...


That Willits full sus was a flexy flyer! I remember it from the show. You could smack the seat tube with the seat stays, pretty easily.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

IMHO the 29"er did not exist until WTB introduced "The Tire". Before that they were 700c mountain bikes running narrow tires. Pretty simple.


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

jeff said:


> IMHO the 29"er did not exist until WTB introduced "The Tire". Before that they were 700c mountain bikes running narrow tires. Pretty simple.


Some of the bikes pictured above were created before "The Tire" was invented. YET, as you can see, some of them are pictured with modern 29er tires.......so did they magically change genres with a simple tire swap? What happens if somebody puts a thin slick tire on a new Superfly? Does it suddenly become a road bike? If I put white walls on a Zaskar does it become a cruiser?

Just curious. I'm desperate to understand the sanctity of the term 29er.


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

Xizang11 said:


> Some of the bikes pictured above were created before "The Tire" was invented. YET, as you can see, some of them are pictured with modern 29er tires.......so did they magically change genres with a simple tire swap? What happens if somebody puts a thin slick tire on a new Superfly? Does it suddenly become a road bike? If I put white walls on a Zaskar does it become a cruiser?
> 
> Just curious. I'm desperate to understand the sanctity of the term 29er.


There is no sanctity of anything vintage, retro, or classic, right? 

That's the point of the demarcation regarding "The Tire". Previous to the introduction of the Nano, there was no tire on a 700c/622ISO bead that was "that big".

Putting that tire on something it didn't come on originally is a modification. In this forum, it seems that "original equipment" spec is preferred if possible. So- to that end, any "29"er", (or whatever you decide it should be called), that would "fit into this forum" probably should have come "as built" with a Nanoraptor, or subsequent "29"er" tire that was introduced afterward. This would put the date for the oldest possible 29"er to be 1999.

While it is true that many folks installed 1999/2000 production Nanos on Diamondback Overdrives, (as a for instance), that bike didn't come stock with those tires. Thus, it was a mod, and only could have happened after 1999. You guys can decide whether that fits into the forum here, but that bike wasn't a "29"er" as new.


----------



## Xizang11 (Feb 3, 2008)

Guitar Ted said:


> There is no sanctity of anything vintage, retro, or classic, right?
> 
> /QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

Up next... Did the 650b mountain bike exist prior to the introduction of the Pacenti Neo-Moto tire in the late 2000s?

Modern 2.3" 650B tires fit fine on the original 700D rims (as pictured below) from 1991:









Lots of wheel sizes existed throughout history. 28" wheels were common in the US through the 1930s on cruisers made for taller kids. Much larger wheels where ridden off road in the 1880s and 1890s on high-wheelers. From the time bikes were invented until modern times multiple wheel sizes have existed - from tiny "micro bike" wheels to huge "high-wheeler" wheels. Wheel sizes have varied in sizes over the years. "29er" is a marketing term used to designate a "modern" size, but it denotes a rim that existed long before the mountain bike existed.

Today, we seem to get caught up in categorizing everything. In the 1980s did people argue over the "24" wheel size which was used on various bikes in smaller sized frames? Or were there discussions to decide if bikes with different sized wheels (Ibis, Cannondale, et al) where mountain bikes at all?

"Big Wheeled" bikes are making a resurgence, but they're not a new idea. The word "29er" is a new term used describe the current iteration of the "big wheel."


----------



## TheSingleGuy (Mar 11, 2004)

MABman said:


> The which came first thing has been beaten to death on the internet...
> 
> View attachment 706550


Ahhhh, the orange Willits. This is, and will always be _THE_ bike. After this there need be no others.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

*Consider this......*

Is this a 29"er or just a conversion?


----------



## MABman (Oct 5, 2008)

laffeaux said:


> The word "29er" is a new term used describe the current iteration of the "big wheel."


And an even older term used for these:


----------



## socal_jack (Dec 30, 2008)

jeff said:


> Is this a 29"er or just a conversion?


He changed the rear dropouts to convert it IIRC. I just built something similar, didn't need to mess with that problem a GT Dyno Moto Glide in 29, (just fit in back). Geo not too good for MTB though, insane long CS and head angle almost too slack, 48 in wheelbase, but a fun cruiser.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

socal_jack said:


> He changed the rear dropouts to convert it IIRC. I just built something similar, didn't need to mess with that problem a GT Dyno Moto Glide in 29, (just fit in back). Geo not too good for MTB though, insane long CS and head angle almost too slack, 48 in wheelbase, but a fun cruiser.


That he would be me. I've converted 4-5 at this point and working on a another.


----------



## socal_jack (Dec 30, 2008)

jeff said:


> That he would be me. I've converted 4-5 at this point and working on a another.


Ah ok, used to have a link to the build but lost it on my last computer, it was sort of an inspiration for this one.


----------



## GrahamWallace (Oct 30, 2008)

*Would i be correct in saying that the first 29er 700x52c WTB NanoRaptor tires have an outside diameter of slightly less than 29 inches? 
*
Is the 29 inch measurement not just a rounding up?

i.e. 622mm rim and 2x52mm width equals 726mm outside diameter.

When converted to inches 726 comes out at 28.5826771653852 inches.

If this is correct it could be argued that bikes using this tire are not true 29ers?


----------



## oldskoolwrench (Jul 12, 2012)

I was just going to mention the Tachyon... the first non 26" wheeled 'crossover' bike, in my mind.

If memory serves, Raleigh released a mountain bike called the 'Tamarack' in '84 or '85 that used 650b wheels. :thumbsup:



laffeaux said:


> Up next... _Did the 650b mountain bike exist prior to the introduction of the Pacenti Neo-Moto tire in the late 2000s?_
> 
> Modern 2.3" 650B tires fit fine on the original 700D rims (as pictured below) from 1991:
> 
> ...


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

GrahamWallace said:


> *Would i be correct in saying that the first 29er 700x52c WTB NanoRaptor tires have an outside diameter of slightly less than 29 inches?
> *
> Is the 29 inch measurement not just a rounding up?
> 
> ...


That is the line I don't follow. There are a lot of rim/tire combos on legit/real modern 29ers that don't sniff the imaginary 29 inches. Overdrives had 700x45 tires. I see vintage and modern tires that are in that rough size and they can still be mtbs. It isn't like you put a 2.6 Ardent on your Hardrock and it becomes All Mountain...


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

GrahamWallace said:


> *Would i be correct in saying that the first 29er 700x52c WTB NanoRaptor tires have an outside diameter of slightly less than 29 inches?
> *
> Is the 29 inch measurement not just a rounding up?
> 
> ...


As one of the first people to shop measure a Nano, yes we rounded up. 28.5826771653852"er just didn't roll off the tongue very well and 28" was already taken.

You blokes are recognized for your efforts with 28"ers by those in the know and good on ya, so quit splitting fine hairs as you will probably lose a few along the way

It is not like there is any money to be made from historical value or who had the idea first of the gendre. That is being taken care of by the big companies that poo pooed the idea from the start and took advantage of waiting until the core market established itself.

Geez, a 29"er won Olympic Gold on your very own soil so take some pride in the part that you all played in that. Enjoy the ride and keep the innovation flow going as the 29"er concept is not the end all, be all for everybody by any means.


----------



## albin0rhin0 (Aug 28, 2012)

That's a rockin 1/2 29er.


----------



## den haag (Feb 18, 2009)

*conversion.*

this is a conversion. it started life as a 26" one speed. when the orange willits finally came back from WTB, closely followed by the nanoraptor, wes needed to convert some of his 28"ers. by pulling the fork legs out a bit, and repositioning the brake studs, we were able to use nanos on this bike without modifying the rear dropout.. my 28"er is also a conversion. it required a little more work. there are a lot of 28"ers that qualify as "vintage", but i honestly don't think any 29"er will ever qualify.


----------



## den haag (Feb 18, 2009)

*one more try,*

and sorry about the mutanoraptors. both bikes fit 29 just fine.


----------

