# Mullet craze is back, with a vengeance...



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Just curious why this trend seems to reemerge with a vengeance every few years. I get the logic around it, but it's been tested to death through the years, and the end consensus is always that it's just "meh". Now all of the sudden, once again YouTube is constantly taking about mullet bikes. People are very concerned whether or not the bike they're buying can be set up mullet, and people are claiming that mullet bikes are the end all be all setup. 

Companies like Carver had tried this stuff long ago and it never took off. When 27.5 hit it came back for a minute, in hopes that the 27.5 rear would work better than the 26 people had been using. Then it fizzled out again. Now it's back.

Is this just a weird trend that newbies tend to grab on to so they can feel like they're "experimenting" with their setup?

Not hating, just generally curious why this trend comes back around every 3-4 years.


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

The early days of Cannondale come to mind...


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

yeah, I don't get it. I won't buy a bike this way. I remember 26/24 and 29/26 and now 29/27.5. _yawn_

I mean, they're bikes, and they go. If I had one, I'd ride it. Apparently my membership to the local mtb club renewed automatically during the membership drive this month and maybe I got an entry into the contest for a mullet bike? If I won it, I'd ride it. But I wouldn't buy one.


----------



## Muggsly (Nov 9, 2005)

Not just bikes but my friend is a high school teacher and kids are rocking mullets again there too. What was once old is now new again.


----------



## david.p (Apr 11, 2011)

I stumbled on this review of the Mullet Cycles Honeymaker a while back and thought it was pretty interesting that the founder thought the idea had enough promise to design a specific geometry around it.


----------



## watermonkey (Jun 21, 2011)

Mullets are super fun. In specific applications, they're superior to symmetry. There's just something about it that makes for stupid fast nimbleness and agility. Unadulterated fun, until it isn't due to different trail conditions. I wouldn't buy a bike that way, but having the ability to swap a back wheel for a very different ride feel and experience is awesome. Its FUN, that's the point. If you don't like it, don't do it. Its not like its an electric motor or something.


----------



## johnsalvaggio (Apr 16, 2020)

Boredom is the driving factor for any niche product. If people just focused on riding what they have life would be simpler...


----------



## Muggsly (Nov 9, 2005)

johnsalvaggio said:


> Boredom is the driving factor for any niche product. If people just focused on riding what they have life would be simpler...


I mean progress is not bad but change for the sake of change is not good either. There is a certain demographic where mullets can be helfpul. Like short riders on DH bikes going really steep and I am sure it helps there and maybe even shorter riders period. But I wouldn't say it's just boredom.


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

I'm no engineer, and my comparison here is a dirt motorcycle vs. a mountain bike...but here it is. A 21" front dirt motor wheel and knobby on most dirt bikes is almost exactly the same height as a 27.5 MTB wheel and tire in the 2.35-2.4 range. An 18" rear dirt motor wheel and knobby is almost exactly the same height at a 26" MTB wheel and tire in the 2.4 range. 

Why don't dirt motos have equally sized wheels and tires front and rear? Off road dirt motos have had the 21/18 combo for decades. MX has gone to a 19" rear for the most part, but it is not for "rollover" improvement...it's lower, stiffer sidewall for track performance. Honda tried a 23" front for a couple of years, and it was a flop.

Yes, some apples to lug wrenches comparison here, but it is a wheels and tires on off road conditions comparison. There are some crossover elements at play based on physics, but I'm not claiming this absolutely answers the mullet question posed here. I think I can state with a little certainty that mountain bike wheels and tires don't have to be the same size front and rear to perform excellently. Having played with the 29/26 combo quite a few years ago, I'll say the slight acceleration benefit of a 26" rear has some merit...along with some negatives. My current setup for my use for decently rough, technical off road is the 27.5/26...the rear having as large a tire footprint as possible. I'm sure I could easily be happy with a 27.5/27.5. The 29/29 has always felt a little ponderous to me. I am obviously in the minority. That's fine...it's why we have options.


----------



## johnsalvaggio (Apr 16, 2020)

Muggsly said:


> I mean progress is not bad but change for the sake of change is not good either. There is a certain demographic where mullets can be helfpul. Like short riders on DH bikes going really steep and I am sure it helps there and maybe even shorter riders period. But I wouldn't say it's just boredom.
> 
> View attachment 1932492


Funny cartoon. I'm just bias to the 29 wheel size, anything smaller just doesn't roll as well IMO. But I do see your point that in certain situations a big/small combo might work better.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

You can't compare old experiments with new experiments. If you did then 29" wheels would still be terrible, instead of dominant right now. Heck those old Mullets weren't even using the modern wheel sizes. 

Geo is different, riding styles are also pretty different, now might be the time. 

Aren't most of the top Pro DHers running mullet now?

A few years back manufacturers built bikes that could do both 29" & 27.5+. Clearly 27.5+ was a complete flop. But any manufacturer of S-L 29ers would be wise make their bikes convertible to mullet configuration.

If I rode a size medium AM bike I would 100% be on a 27.5/ 29 Mullet. That option should exist.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

I must say, as a humble brag, that I had a fantastic mullet in the early 80's as a high schooler...think John Stamos as Blackie Parish in _General Hospital_. Dialed right in, son.


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

I call foul. That pic isn't a mullet. 😁


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

If we want to just turn this thread into posting amazing mullet hair pics, I'm into that.


----------



## S​​usspect (May 12, 2017)

When I had a Banshee Phantom I had both 29 and 27.5+ wheelsets for it. Liked 29 more but had both. When I snapped the rear axle on the 29er hub, I rode mullet for a little while bc why not? Overall I still liked that more than straight 27.5+.

Downsides of that mullet setup were the climbing performance and slacker seat tube, upside was slacker head angle. It kind of took the Phantom out of it's intended design though. If a bike's geometry was specifically designed for it I don't see a problem... it would probably be fun. Maybe with a flip chip for different rear wheels, and preferably without having to run a plus tire in the rear.

On the other hand, I have an Intense Primer now that was actually sold as a mullet, but I've never even tried it with the stock wheelset. Probably just a dumb marketing ploy in this case. The geo is a 29er so that's how I roll with it.


----------



## chiefsilverback (Dec 20, 2019)

I don't think they are for everyone, but they serve certain purposed, Hardtail Party just published this video riding some crazy scary trail on a 'mulleted' Banshee Paradox that really helped the bike in that specific situation:


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

I've never tried a 29/27.5 mullet, but I absolutely loved my 27.5/26 mullet back in the day. I tend to prefer 27.5 bikes now, so I find a 29er mullet really interesting, but only if it doesn't compromise the seat angle too much. 

On a side note, I've noticed some of the kids in my neighborhood are now rocking mullets. Made me laugh.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Suns_PSD said:


> You can't compare old experiments with new experiments. If you did then 29" wheels would still be terrible, instead of dominant right now. Heck those old Mullets weren't even using the modern wheel sizes.
> 
> Geo is different, riding styles are also pretty different, now might be the time.
> 
> ...


Exactly, I also hated the first 29ers I tried but the geo has came a long way. It looks like for racing 29" in the front is the way to go. Rear wheel size for enduro and DH seems to be more about preference and height. I believe Cedric Gracia said there's no reason to run anything other than a 29" wheel up front for racing.

For XC it's probably a different story.


----------



## lixxfe (Apr 19, 2012)

I mulleted my 27.5 bike by running a shorter fork to preserve the geo, but eventually reverted to full 27.5. I definitely noticed the loss in ability to clean some technical climbs with the 27.5 front. Even with the 27.5 rear, though, I get buzzed on occasion, so I can see the advantage of a bike designed to be mulleted. Mulleting a bike not designed for it involves too many compromises IMO. At the end of the day, mullet configuration is just another parameter the frame designer has at their disposal.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

mullet bikes are not back, it's not a craze, it's a dead end.


----------



## unerlaubt (Aug 2, 2019)

The reverse mullet is the new hotness.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Verboten said:


> The reverse mullet is the new hotness.


20" BMX front, 36er rear.

Give it a couple seasons, it's coming. Surly will build the first one and then shortly after Trek will start selling a crappier aluminum version.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

nothing beats the original mullet


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

127.0.0.1 said:


> nothing beats the original mullet
> 
> View attachment 1932510


160mm full suspension 20" front 36er rear RATFINK edition. Cannondales big break back into relevance.


----------



## Ogre (Feb 17, 2005)

Gonna rock the trend here and say I might give it a shot over the summer. I have a Honzo ST just waiting for an oddball experiment like this. I'm a bit concerned about dropping the BB even more though since the bike isn't designed for this. Maybe I'll add some travel to the fork at the same time for the full effect


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

chiefsilverback said:


> I don't think they are for everyone, but they serve certain purposed, Hardtail Party just published this video riding some crazy scary trail on a 'mulleted' Banshee Paradox that really helped the bike in that specific situation:


I'd be curious to know how it "really helped". Not saying he's wrong, but riding that trail with a 29 vs 27.5 rear is probably a very, very minimal difference.

Keep in mind that these guys on YouTube tend to embellish things to make their content seem more interesting.


----------



## CCSS (Apr 6, 2004)

I can highly recommend the mini-mullet. I’m running 29x3.25 up front and 29x2.6 out back - mostly because the 2.6 is the biggest that will fit. 

Diameter of the front is more than an inch greater than the rear. Works great.

Have two buddies doing exactly the same thing, but with 3.0 up front. Mini-fat front for the win.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Nomad77 (May 21, 2021)

I ran a few SS bikes as mullets and/ or fat fronts several years ago. I found some benefits as I have short legs as well as the somewhat improved rollover factor. Honestly haven’t tried it with new geometries.


----------



## unerlaubt (Aug 2, 2019)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I'd be curious to know how it "really helped". Not saying he's wrong, but riding that trail with a 29 vs 27.5 rear is probably a very, very minimal difference.
> 
> Keep in mind that these guys on YouTube tend to embellish things to make their content seem more interesting.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

because "technology finally catches up".


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

127.0.0.1 said:


> mullet bikes are not back, it's not a craze, it's a dead end.


Well, that's a relief. 😁


----------



## cookieMonster (Feb 23, 2004)

I haven’t been on a 29” wheeled bike that I’ve been truly happy with in terms of jumping. That rear wheel always ends up getting nice and friendly, if you know what I mean. It’s not a dealbreaker, but I prefer 27.5s or even 26” wheels for jumping and freeride type stuff. It’s just more nimble fore and aft, as well as laterally.

I have a very modern, some would say extreme 29” Honzo ESD. I love it on most terrain, but prefer my older bike 26” rear/27.5 front for extremely tech terrain.


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

127.0.0.1 said:


> mullet bikes are not back, it's not a craze, it's a dead end.


I would be surprised if mullets don't blow up like we've never seen before soon. Why you ask? Because 29'ers have taken over like no one ever thought they would with many shorter riders jumping on the bandwagon. Many of these sub 5'10" riders will grow tired of burn outs on their bung holes. Considering the lion's share of rollover happens up front, mullets will still provide most of the benefits of full 29 without the skid marks on your drawers.


----------



## sherwin24 (Jul 23, 2010)

29x26 mullets were far different that 29x27.5 I'm guessing. Willing to bet we not only see more of it, but it becomes common if not "standard" over time. Geo has changed, everything is getting optimized and figured out to the nth degree. For a good majority of bikes and riders a mullet might actually be ideal. They have done a fantastic job getting 29ers to have the geo and ride characteristics they had trouble with early on. However I am guessing there are still compromises that designers are sitting there saying to themselves "If only I could change that axle path a bit this way, or get the bb a bit lower. Front suspension is what it is. Rear suspension has so much go into the pivots and where to place them, making it all fit. My money is on that that little bit extra in the rear gained by a smaller wheel will pay off in the long run as mtb's continue to mature and progress.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Mullets were never cool but a lot of people do live in the trailer park.


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

TNC said:


> I'm no engineer, and my comparison here is a dirt motorcycle vs. a mountain bike...but here it is. A 21" front dirt motor wheel and knobby on most dirt bikes is almost exactly the same height as a 27.5 MTB wheel and tire in the 2.35-2.4 range. An 18" rear dirt motor wheel and knobby is almost exactly the same height at a 26" MTB wheel and tire in the 2.4 range.
> 
> Why don't dirt motos have equally sized wheels and tires front and rear? Off road dirt motos have had the 21/18 combo for decades. MX has gone to a 19" rear for the most part, but it is not for "rollover" improvement...it's lower, stiffer sidewall for track performance. Honda tried a 23" front for a couple of years, and it was a flop.
> 
> Yes, some apples to lug wrenches comparison here, but it is a wheels and tires on off road conditions comparison. There are some crossover elements at play based on physics, but I'm not claiming this absolutely answers the mullet question posed here. I think I can state with a little certainty that mountain bike wheels and tires don't have to be the same size front and rear to perform excellently. Having played with the 29/26 combo quite a few years ago, I'll say the slight acceleration benefit of a 26" rear has some merit...along with some negatives. My current setup for my use for decently rough, technical off road is the 27.5/26...the rear having as large a tire footprint as possible. I'm sure I could easily be happy with a 27.5/27.5. The 29/29 has always felt a little ponderous to me. I am obviously in the minority. That's fine...it's why we have options.


Also of note, the dirtbike knobby has been going since the 60's and the tread pattern has changed very little. Spot on observation although, a 250 cc stroker makes more watts than anyone!


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

I decided to try mixed wheel because i was on a 27.5 with 65.5 HTA and I liked the slacker 63 (unsagged) hta on my hardtail. Also i wanted a slightly higher BB for less pedal strikes. So went with same travel (170mm Z1 bomber for old school flavor even if its now fox owned and a good price) in 29 up front and a 29er wheel. HTA became 64, BB raised 17 mm (only 7 mm comparing the new low to the old tall flip chip mode). These were the geo changes I was after and i like the results as anticipated. Just need to run enough sag and no compression platform switch to still feel planted deep inside the bike in high speed turns. 

the unexpected bonus is that the turning radius has definitely decreased and it is easier to drift the rear, or both wheels (no brakes) which is where the fun playful comments come from. This bonus point is what will make me always want 1 mixed wheel bike in my fleet but matching wheels will always have their place.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

Ogre said:


> Gonna rock the trend here and say I might give it a shot over the summer. I have a Honzo ST just waiting for an oddball experiment like this. I'm a bit concerned about dropping the BB even more though since the bike isn't designed for this. Maybe I'll add some travel to the fork at the same time for the full effect


And/ or a taller lower headset cup would be a cheap way to lift it a tiny bit more if yours isnt already max height


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

cookieMonster said:


> I love it on most terrain, but prefer my older bike 26" rear/27.5 front for extremely tech terrain.


I'm thinking about trying a 27.5/26 mullet. I did a half ass version 29/27.5 mullet and I didn't really like it.


----------



## Pisgah (Feb 24, 2006)

One of my bikes is a mullet (29x27.5). It accelerates well on technical singletrack uphills. The bike also has a short wheelbase, which is good in tight places. However, the bike is slower than full 29ers on non-technical uphills, and it rides rougher in the chunk.


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Just curious why this trend seems to reemerge with a vengeance every few years. I get the logic around it, but it's been tested to death through the years, and the end consensus is always that it's just "meh". Now all of the sudden, once again YouTube is constantly taking about mullet bikes. People are very concerned whether or not the bike they're buying can be set up mullet, and people are claiming that mullet bikes are the end all be all setup.
> 
> Companies like Carver had tried this stuff long ago and it never took off. When 27.5 hit it came back for a minute, in hopes that the 27.5 rear would work better than the 26 people had been using. Then it fizzled out again. Now it's back.
> 
> ...


I swap in a 27.5 front or rear to roll with a 29er on the other end with some regularity on my single speed MTB. Mostly to get the tire girth/cush to match up with what I am riding in terms of trail features, mileage or wear on tires. I tend to like a 29er rear for longer rides and 27.5 rear (and maybe front too) for more technical rides. If I am where a bit more front end clearance helps, than I slap a 3.0 29er front wheel on.

Not trying to be trendy... more getting the right tool(s) for the job.


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

Monty219 said:


> And/ or a taller lower headset cup would be a cheap way to lift it a tiny bit more if yours isnt already max height


Look right here... MTB Tools Custom Extended Crown Race for Fat Bike Suspension Fork Clearance | eBay

That is a very easy way to get some lift beyond what has been offered by others. 
Inexpensive and no lower cup change, just a simple crown race swap.


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Just curious why this trend seems to reemerge with a vengeance every few years. I get the logic around it, but it's been tested to death through the years, and the end consensus is always that it's just "meh". Now all of the sudden, once again YouTube is constantly taking about mullet bikes. People are very concerned whether or not the bike they're buying can be set up mullet, and people are claiming that mullet bikes are the end all be all setup.
> 
> Companies like Carver had tried this stuff long ago and it never took off. When 27.5 hit it came back for a minute, in hopes that the 27.5 rear would work better than the 26 people had been using. Then it fizzled out again. Now it's back.
> 
> ...


SSS...I've been thinking more on your premise here. I think you may be taking this wheel size thing like it's an issue that fits one specific bike, one specific rider, and one specific riding style and terrain. Today we have bikes, riders, and applications across a huge span of variety...bikes with different geometries...bikes in different frame sizes...riders of different sizes and ergonomics...bikes for vastly different terrains...etc., etc., etc.

Is it really that shocking that the selection of different wheel sizes is that alien a concept? Is it really that strange that we have bikes with different frame sizes and travel numbers all over the board? There really is no one-size-fits-all. You mention "weird". Not trying to be argumentative or attacking you personally, but maybe it's weirder to think one size should fit all.

I was wondering if your screen name means you only ride single speed mountain bikes? That's a question, not a slam. I would kind of bet you have other bike setups too. However, I can see a single speed aficionado leaning heavily toward 29'er only in the sense that maintaining momentum and rollover with one gear is extremely critical.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

TNC said:


> SSS...I've been thinking more on your premise here. I think you may be taking this wheel size thing like it's an issue that fits one specific bike, one specific rider, and one specific riding style and terrain. Today we have bikes, riders, and applications across a huge span of variety...bikes with different geometries...bikes in different frame sizes...riders of different sizes and ergonomics...bikes for vastly different terrains...etc., etc., etc.
> 
> Is it really that shocking that the selection of different wheel sizes is that alien a concept? Is it really that strange that we have bikes with different frame sizes and travel numbers all over the board? There really is no one-size-fits-all. You mention "weird". Not trying to be argumentative or attacking you personally, but maybe it's weirder to think one size should fit all.
> 
> I was wondering if your screen name means you only ride single speed mountain bikes? That's a question, not a slam. I would kind of bet you have other bike setups too. However, I can see a single speed aficionado leaning heavily toward 29'er only in the sense that maintaining momentum and rollover with one gear is extremely critical.


I'm not assuming a one size fits all type of situation, or assuming anything for that matter. I'm not even saying mullet isnt a legit setup, I'm sure there are situations where it has its perks. I was just pondering how it seems to come back around every few years. Like it's a huge deal that everyone is interested in, then you don't hear about it for 2 years and then all of the sudden people are all about mullet setups again. If it were a one time trend I wouldn't think anything of it, but it's one of the few things that seems to circle back often.

Edit: yes I only ride SS, and 29er. I've never had the urge to purchase a second wheelset just for the sake of trying a different size in the rear.


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

Hair style setups have been done for how many decades? Who really cares? Participate in it or ignore it as needed. 

Moving forward, things have changed over those decades to include geometry of frame, fork rake, tire volume being above the early 2.125's of yore. People are indeed "experimenting" when they give a hair style build a go, c'est la vie! 

Disclaimer; I ride SS and geared bikes, because they are fucking bikes!


----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

I believe purpose built mx with cs optimized for smaller wheels is here to stay, especially in DH.

Flip chips too, give me more usable adjustment.

Some people are always going to Franken bike no matter what.


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> I'm not assuming a one size fits all type of situation, or assuming anything for that matter. I'm not even saying mullet isnt a legit setup, I'm sure there are situations where it has its perks. I was just pondering how it seems to come back around every few years. Like it's a huge deal that everyone is interested in, then you don't hear about it for 2 years and then all of the sudden people are all about mullet setups again. If it were a one time trend I wouldn't think anything of it, but it's one of the few things that seems to circle back often.
> 
> Edit: yes I only ride SS, and 29er. I've never had the urge to purchase a second wheelset just for the sake of trying a different size in the rear.


You bring up a good point on how the topic resurfaces with what appears to be an increased interest on the different wheel size options. However, my take there is that the issue isn't resurfacing because people weren't doing it. It resurfaces because conversations come up about it in various formats like MTBR etc. I work at a shop, and I hardly see and hear about how the industry and/or riders are using wheel and tire setups globally, but I see the occasional bike from a given manufacturer here and there with "mullet" offerings, and I see individuals with bikes in the same setup that were delivered that way or were changed by the owner. When it started in the 69'er venue years ago, I think it's been around in various forms since...just not featured on the 6:00PM news...CDT of course.


----------



## MattiThundrrr (Jul 6, 2019)

Oh my. There is a company that does nothing but mullets.


https://www.mulletcycles.com/#bikes


They're really going all in with the weird dead ends, their hardtail offering is an e stay

Kinda like the discount barbershop at the flea market


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

MattiThundrrr said:


> Oh my. There is a company that does nothing but mullets.
> 
> 
> https://www.mulletcycles.com/#bikes
> ...


Oof, yea that hardtail is rough looking. The chainstay is elevated on both sides too. That's goofy as hell.


----------



## S​​usspect (May 12, 2017)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Oof, yea that hardtail is rough looking. The chainstay is elevated on both sides too. That's goofy as hell.


Rough/goofy looking... sounds like they made it work though.









Review: Has Mullet Cycles nailed mixing wheel sizes with their titanium Honey Maker?


We review Mullet Cycles new mixed wheel titanium hardtail with 29er & 27.5 wheels. We find out if they nailed what dirt bikes have done for years?




bikerumor.com





Not that I'd run out and buy one today, but.... what if we're all dinosaurs and in ten years this thread is in the MTBR museum?


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

^^Interesting that they are keeping the geo numbers a secret. Lol...I kinda like it. It'll let you decide after you ride the bike.


----------



## Finch Platte (Nov 14, 2003)

What was the bike that had a 26" front, 24" rear- it was a Raleigh. I had one, but it was way too small for me and killed my knees.


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

Finch Platte said:


> What was the bike that had a 26" front, 24" rear- it was a Raleigh. I had one, but it was way too small for me and killed my knees.


I don't know anything about the Raleigh but the Specialized big hit had 26/24 i watched a friend send some big shiz on it back around 2003.


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

MattiThundrrr said:


> Oh my. There is a company that does nothing but mullets.
> 
> 
> https://www.mulletcycles.com/#bikes
> ...


I actually like the looks of that thing, but I have a Trek Stache too, and to be fair, I really do enjoy riding it, but think it's pretty ugly.


----------



## 63expert (Jun 4, 2020)




----------



## TraxFactory (Sep 10, 1999)

New Bronson looks real good, as does the Insurgent


----------



## slimat99 (May 21, 2008)

TraxFactory said:


> New Bronson looks real good, as does the Insurgent


I love how they show the rider way off the back to highlight butt buzz. When they want to sell us 29'ers they say ride in the middle not off the back. When they want to sell mullets they advertise riding off the back.

Not sure why the rider pictured is so off the back here? Clearly they told him to exaggerate his body english. This is an example of where the rider should be riding more in the middle. God I do love marketing. Fun stuff.


----------



## Ogre (Feb 17, 2005)

63expert said:


>


Rode the last model year Bronson a couple years ago and loved it. This just looks right in my wheelhouse.


----------



## Picard (Apr 5, 2005)

What is the advantages of mullet? 

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk


----------



## Ogre (Feb 17, 2005)

Picard said:


> What is the advantages of mullet?


I think in a nutshell, it should have the same rollover/ control advantage of the bigger wheel up front but the smaller back tire moves the rear axel closer to the bottom bracket which gives you better control when the trail is tighter.

With regards to hair styles, it's lower maintenance than a proper long cut while still being cool. Particularly if paired with a single earring.


----------



## C619V (Mar 8, 2021)

Picard said:


> What is the advantages of mullet?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk













Now you know who he ended up with right?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

I confess to not reading this entire thread but I read enough of it to come to the conclusion that there are a lot of confused riders out there.

While anyone can replace a 29" rear wheel with a 27.5" rear wheel and call it a mullet, it seems many participants to this thread don't understand that an actual mullet bike is designed as such. Simply replacing a larger wheel with a smaller one on a bike that wasn't designed around the smaller wheel will change geometry in unintended ways.

A proper mullet bike is designed as such. Period.

To illustrate this argument, consider a rider who buys a 29er - that's 29" wheels front and rear. Then they buy a second set of wheels, this time 27.5" F&R. The rider installs the smaller wheels to see if s/he likes 27.5" wheels better than 29" wheels and ends the ride claiming 27.5" wheels are a bad design because they cause too many pedal strikes.

No they don't. Think about it.

We can't just install a smaller rear wheel and claim we do or don't like a genuine mullet bike. We F up the manufacturer's geometry if we do that. Want to actually try a mullet bike? Then buy a frame designed for a small rear wheel and a larger front wheel. This is the only way to maintain intended geometry.

Tangential story (TLDRers skip this paragraph): I ride 29" wheels. I've had riders ask me, "Doesn't a 29" frame make the bottom bracket too high?" Seems there are a lot of people out there who don't understand that a frame designer can place the bottom bracket anywhere s/he wants it regardless of wheel size. Why mention this? Because the same rules apply to a bike with diverse size wheels - it's gotta be designed for diverse wheel sizes - front & rear. And it _can_ be designed that way. But we can't just mix or match wheels in a frame not specifically designed for different size wheels simply because we we want to experiment with an oddball wheel. Not and maintain the manufacturer's intended handling, anyway.

As for why mullet bikes keep coming around, that's because it's a viable concept. Meanwhile many comments within this thread illustrate the bike buying public's lack of understanding as to why the concept is viable. If it's not accepted by the public, it won't fly - regardless how awesome it actually is.
=sParty


----------



## Ogre (Feb 17, 2005)

Sparticus said:


> To illustrate this argument, consider a rider who buys a 29er - that's 29" wheels front and rear. Then they buy a second set of wheels, this time 27.5" F&R. The rider installs the smaller wheels to see if s/he likes 27.5" wheels better than 29" wheels and ends the ride claiming 27.5" wheels are a bad design because they cause too many pedal strikes.


Yeah, I was thinking about doing this with my Honzo but realized quickly it would lower the BB and "Fixing" that would require either welding skills or some kind of jiggery which I don't understand.

I _think_ you might be able to get a 27.5 bike and with the correct fork put a 29" wheel up front, but even that is suspect.



Sparticus said:


> As for why mullet bikes keep coming around, that's because it's a viable concept. Meanwhile many comments within this thread illustrate the bike buying public's lack of understanding as to why the concept is viable. If it's not accepted by the public, it won't fly - regardless how awesome it actually is.


I think the idea is coming around. Pros and big bike brands adopting it helps a lot.

I've never cared a whole lot about whether something is accepted by the public or not. If it works well and I can get parts for it, I'll ride it. While mullet bikes geometry might be less common, the wheels and tires are all commonly available.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Sparticus said:


> I've had riders ask me, "Doesn't a 29" frame make the bottom bracket too high?"


People don't _still_ ask that question I hope. 29" wheels have been around awhile now.


----------



## Picard (Apr 5, 2005)

This smell like snake oil

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk


----------



## 63expert (Jun 4, 2020)

Sparticus said:


> I confess to not reading this entire thread but I read enough of it to come to the conclusion that there are a lot of confused riders out there.
> 
> While anyone can replace a 29" rear wheel with a 27.5" rear wheel and call it a mullet, it seems many participants to this thread don't understand that an actual mullet bike is designed as such. Simply replacing a larger wheel with a smaller one on a bike that wasn't designed around the smaller wheel will change geometry in unintended ways.
> 
> ...


Or you can just not even give a fly about what the manufacturer intended and change elements of the bike that matter to you most. The Hightower V2 has been sold with two different shock stroke lengths and is approved for a range of fork lengths and wheel sizes. If you ride a lot of steep flow trail and jump lines then maybe a slack front end and rear tire clearance are way more important than pedal strikes. I haven't had a motorcycle with stock geometry in over 40 years.

It is your bike. Make it what you want.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

Nat said:


> People don't _still_ ask that question I hope. 29" wheels have been around awhile now.


I don't recall when the last time was but personally I can't believe the question was _ever_ asked. 
It seems people either understand frame design or they don't. 
=sParty


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

63expert said:


> Or you can just not even give a fly about what the manufacturer intended and change elements of the bike that matter to you most. The Hightower V2 has been sold with two different shock stroke lengths and is approved for a range of fork lengths and wheel sizes. If you ride a lot of steep flow trail and jump lines then maybe a slack front end and rear tire clearance are way more important than pedal strikes. I haven't had a motorcycle with stock geometry in over 40 years.
> 
> It is your bike. Make it what you want.


Agreed. I do likewise. All I'm suggesting is that people know what they're doing before they start modifying. 
=sParty


----------



## handy_andy_85 (May 7, 2021)

I was watching a Santa Cruz Bronson review video and heard them reference the new mullet bike as their MX design. That makes sense to me as most modern dirt bikes have a 21" front wheel and either a 18 or 19" in the rear. There has to be something to that. I have never ridden a mullet but I have had the haircut and it was a good time. I hope I get a chance to demo one.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

The new Insurgent can run both a 27.5 and 29 on the front. You just need a 10mm longer 27.5 fork to run the 27.5 wheel...which still has a lower front end than running a 29r fork and 29r wheel.


----------



## Bikeventures (Jul 21, 2014)

My 27.5 bike already came with mulleted suspension (160 f/ 140 r). I think my summer project will be to find a cheap, used 29 140 fork and 29 wheel.

My theory is changing from a 160 fork 27.5 wheel to a 140 fork 29 wheel will preserve the original geometry.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Bikeventures said:


> My 27.5 bike already came with mulleted suspension (160 f/ 140 r). I think my summer project will be to find a cheap, used 29 140 fork and 29 wheel.
> 
> My theory is changing from a 160 fork 27.5 wheel to a 140 fork 29 wheel will preserve the original geometry.


I was actually thinking about just getting new fork lowers. I already have the shorter air spring.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

MX = this year's "downcountry"


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Sparticus said:


> I confess to not reading this entire thread but I read enough of it to come to the conclusion that there are a lot of confused riders out there.
> 
> While anyone can replace a 29" rear wheel with a 27.5" rear wheel and call it a mullet, it seems many participants to this thread don't understand that an actual mullet bike is designed as such. Simply replacing a larger wheel with a smaller one on a bike that wasn't designed around the smaller wheel will change geometry in unintended ways.
> 
> ...


A bit of a thread revive, but I agree.

It seems a little shocking to me at least that many posters appear to be unaware that when moving to a mullet setup, different options exist to retain the bike's original intended geo, more or less, which is the desired objective for most. Merely replacing a 29 rear wheel with a 27.5 wheel is going to lead to some pretty crazy $hit in most cases, including a ridiculous amount of pedal strikes. Some manufacturers offer replacement linkages, others offer mullet models OEM with the desired geo, and some, like Forbidden, give you both options. I don't think this is some kind of industry conspiracy. As crazy as it may sound, for some, for a variety of possible reasons, a mullet may simply be the optimal setup. At minimum, it's another option that's available. Not sure why some seem to find this irritating or undesirable.


----------



## Sparticus (Dec 28, 1999)

mtnbkrmike said:


> A bit of a thread revive, but I agree.
> 
> It seems a little shocking to me at least that many posters appear to be unaware that when moving to a mullet setup, different options exist to retain the bike's original intended geo, more or less, which is the desired objective for most. Merely replacing a 29 rear wheel with a 27.5 wheel is going to lead to some pretty crazy $hit in most cases, including a ridiculous amount of pedal strikes. Some manufacturers offer replacement linkages, others offer mullet models OEM with the desired geo, and some, like Forbidden, give you both options. I don't think this is some kind of industry conspiracy. As crazy as it may sound, for some, for a variety of possible reasons, a mullet may simply be the optimal setup. At minimum, it's another option that's available. Not sure why some seem to find this irritating or undesirable.


Right on.

In order to maintain BB height, STA & HA when swapping out a 29" rear wheel and swapping in a 27.5", seatstays would need to be lengthened. Also, the frame manufacturer may or may not choose to take advantage of the opportunity to shorten the chainstays when employing the smaller rear wheel.

Without doing at least the former, the bike won't handle optimally. Look at Guerrilla Gravity's modular frame platform. All their bikes, regardless of wheel size or amount of travel, employ the same front triangle. It's the seatstays & chainstays that change. And GG will sell you a mullet if you want one -- designed as such, not merely an afterthought.

I believe one reason mullets are gaining favor with frame manufacturers is that it's a relatively easy to get more frame travel. It's harder to design a long travel frame with 29" rear wheel; easier to design one with a 27.5" wheel. This, plus the rollover benefits of the larger wheel are greater at the front of the bike. Get the front wheel over a challenging obstacle and the rear will follow regardless of wheel size there. Mullets just make sense.
=sParty


----------



## Monty219 (Oct 26, 2020)

My mx setup has proven to be a ton of fun. I tried this because i wanted a stiffer fork (went from35 to 36 mm stanchion fork), slacker hta and higher bb. I went from 650b up to 29 front and maintained the same travel to achieve geo changes but dropped steerer spacers 10mm to keep reach and stack close to original. Love it.


----------



## stripes (Sep 6, 2016)

Sparticus said:


> Right on.
> 
> I believe one reason mullets are gaining favor with frame manufacturers is that it's a relatively easy to get more frame travel. It's harder to design a long travel frame with 29" rear wheel; easier to design one with a 27.5" wheel. This, plus the rollover benefits of the larger wheel are greater at the front of the bike. Get the front wheel over a challenging obstacle and the rear will follow regardless of wheel size there. Mullets just make sense.
> =sParty


They make sense until you try to pedal one uphill


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

stripes said:


> They make sense until you try to pedal one uphill


That would be very true with a frame that was not designed around two differing wheel sizes. Early Cannondale was designed for the purpose of 26/24 back in its heyday, for instance. Early 80's iirc.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Sparticus said:


> Right on.
> 
> In order to maintain BB height, STA & HA when swapping out a 29" rear wheel and swapping in a 27.5", seatstays would need to be lengthened. Also, the frame manufacturer may or may not choose to take advantage of the opportunity to shorten the chainstays when employing the smaller rear wheel.
> 
> ...


An alternative to a manufacturer offering modified seatstays and, possibly, chain stays, is to offer a modified linkage. The Ziggy Link offered by Forbidden very easily and inexpensively converts the Druid or Dreadnought from full 29 to mullet, while only dropping the BB 6 mm and HTA .5 of a degree.

Here is a decent summary of the changes (in another post, he stated that climbing was NOT affected):










Edit: here is another interesting comment from the same poster:


----------



## TNC (Jan 21, 2004)

stripes said:


> They make sense until you try to pedal one uphill


Pfffft!...even as an old man pedaling a 27.5/26 SC Bullit, SC Nomad, and Spec Stumpjumper up hills for years, this so called problem is highly overrated. I've never heard so much hand wringing and whining over geometry, handling, and climbing over an issue involving anything close to even serious recreational riders. I think there are very few "world cuppers" here to be concerned over this issue.

Bicyclists have become a really disappointing lot, where every idea, component, bike, and design that aren't within their narrow wheelhouse of preference are complete rubbish.


----------



## A. Rider (Jul 25, 2017)

stripes said:


> They make sense until you try to pedal one uphill


I had a 2014 Canfield Nimble 9 (hardtail) that I would ride with 2 wheel sizes; 29er wheels, and 27.5+ wheels. My absolute favorite wheel combo on that bike was a mullet, with 29x2.4 front and 27.5x2.8 back. That thing was just as good climbing for me as a mullet versus all-29 or all-27.5+, maybe even better... hmf.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

A. Rider said:


> I had a 2014 Canfield Nimble 9 (hardtail) that I would ride with 2 wheel sizes; 29er wheels, and 27.5+ wheels. My absolute favorite wheel combo on that bike was a mullet, with 29x2.4 front and 27.5x2.8 back. That thing was just as good climbing for me as a mullet versus all-29 or all-27.5+, maybe even better... hmf.


Ok, someone's gotta say it... that's more of a piglet then a mullet.


----------



## cookieMonster (Feb 23, 2004)

Apologies if I said this already in this thread, but 29” in the rear just doesn’t work for all people and all situations.

Some of the steepest trails I ride require getting very low on the bike, and on my Honzo ESD (29” front and back) the seat doesn’t get in the way, but the rear tire does, and I am 5’ 10” tall. It’s usually not a major issue but it’s a little unnerving to crest over a tall rock roll in a no-fall zone and feel the rear tire on your butt. It’s never been an issue with my enduro bike which has a 26” rear and 27.5 front.

My next full suspension bike will definitely have a 27.5 rear; maybe front and rear — if they are still available.


----------



## A. Rider (Jul 25, 2017)

EatsDirt said:


> Ok, someone's gotta say it... that's more of a piglet then a mullet.


Oh great, yet _another_ category.


----------



## mrallen (Oct 11, 2017)

cookieMonster said:


> Apologies if I said this already in this thread, but 29" in the rear just doesn't work for all people and all situations.
> 
> Some of the steepest trails I ride require getting very low on the bike, and on my Honzo ESD (29" front and back) the seat doesn't get in the way, but the rear tire does, and I am 5' 10" tall. It's usually not a major issue but it's a little unnerving to crest over a tall rock roll in a no-fall zone and feel the rear tire on your butt. It's never been an issue with my enduro bike which has a 26" rear and 27.5 front.
> 
> My next full suspension bike will definitely have a 27.5 rear; maybe front and rear - if they are still available.


This is the only really strong argument that resonates with me. I personally don't have an issue with rear tire buzzing at 5'10, but I can see people with shorter legs having the issue. After that it is all personal preference to me. If you like how it rides, then you prefer it and should ride it if you want. Kind of like 27.5 bikes versus 29s.

Personally, my OCD wouldn't let me own one. They just look "wrong" to me. If someone gave me an Insurgent, ride it though.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

mrallen said:


> This is the only really strong argument that resonates with me. I personally don't have an issue with rear tire buzzing at 5'10, but I can see people with shorter legs having the issue. After that it is all personal preference to me. If you like how it rides, then you prefer it and should ride it if you want. Kind of like 27.5 bikes versus 29s.
> 
> Personally, my OCD wouldn't let me own one. They just look "wrong" to me. If someone gave me an Insurgent, ride it though.


I think the typical geo-correct mullet setup is worth more then just avoiding butt buzz. The corner feel and change in traction bias are big contributors in my mind.... among other things.


----------



## mrallen (Oct 11, 2017)

EatsDirt said:


> I think the typical geo-correct mullet setup is worth more then just avoiding butt buzz. The corner feel and change in traction bias are big contributors in my mind.... among other things.


That falls under preference for me. I ride both wheels sizes (non-mullet) and there is a definite difference in rear wheel rollover. If I'm going to ride a 29 front, I want the same rollover feel in the rear - which is my preference. So, not saying you're wrong, but to me that doesn't fall into a "definite benefit" in my mind.


----------



## stiingya (Apr 30, 2004)

I know this is a bit of a necro post. But in my opinion there is no "correct" or "perfect" geometry. The idea that you change a wheel size or use a longer or shorter fork and then "ruin" the geometry is a fallacy. Change it: YES! And then for sure some will hate the change and some will like the change, and some won't think it's that big of a deal one way or the other as long as their contact points get close to the same as before.

For sure geometry gets "clusters" due to specificity of use, trends, and general preference. But within those clusters you still find significant variance. Within specificity of use you can still find widely different opinion's on what works best, etc. Find 2 world cup riders of the same height, weight and discipline and your just as likely to find a totally different set up as you are a similar set up. You can find mullets, you can find swing arm extensions, you can find custom linkages, and lots of different forks and angle sets. There are taller riders on smaller bikes, there are shorter riders on bigger bikes, etc., etc.

I mean "preference" was a good word, but to me it was used in a bit of a dismissive way and it shouldn't be because the top tiers of our sport are just as likely to be on a full custom set up as they are to be on a high end shop floor model. (and of course those on a "shop floor model" may have helped design that frame and picked the components OR not!)


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

I have not really considered a mullet, but as far as I can tell there is no reason the front and rear wheels have to be the same size.


----------



## Rob L (Aug 8, 2005)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Just curious why this trend seems to reemerge with a vengeance every few years. I get the logic around it, but it's been tested to death through the years, and the end consensus is always that it's just "meh". Now all of the sudden, once again YouTube is constantly taking about mullet bikes. People are very concerned whether or not the bike they're buying can be set up mullet, and people are claiming that mullet bikes are the end all be all setup.
> 
> Companies like Carver had tried this stuff long ago and it never took off. When 27.5 hit it came back for a minute, in hopes that the 27.5 rear would work better than the 26 people had been using. Then it fizzled out again. Now it's back.
> 
> ...


The VVA Topanga! even back in the day! 24”/20”


----------



## plummet (Jul 8, 2005)

Im gettung a mullet for my next bike. 
Why? I ride a lot of steep tech. 29 roles over stuff better, but grinds your arse on the steep.
So....
27.5 at the back better steep riding and 29 up front for better rolling over ****.


----------



## richrider13204 (7 mo ago)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Just curious why this trend seems to reemerge with a vengeance every few years. I get the logic around it, but it's been tested to death through the years, and the end consensus is always that it's just "meh". Now all of the sudden, once again YouTube is constantly taking about mullet bikes. People are very concerned whether or not the bike they're buying can be set up mullet, and people are claiming that mullet bikes are the end all be all setup.
> 
> Companies like Carver had tried this stuff long ago and it never took off. When 27.5 hit it came back for a minute, in hopes that the 27.5 rear would work better than the 26 people had been using. Then it fizzled out again. Now it's back.
> 
> ...


I current have 4mulkets that I ride here in Colorado. 24x26HT 26x27HT , 26x29FS, and a 27x29FS. Each different in their own craziness. Funville going downhill or just rolling around on the trails. Can go backwards when/if needed. Hard part is keeping up with tire styles/types.


----------



## Ogre (Feb 17, 2005)

Thinking about pissing all the haters off and buying a mullet ebike. 

Like 2 birds with 1 stone.


----------



## S​​usspect (May 12, 2017)

I met the owner of Mullet Cycles recently at a bike show. Got to ride his personal bike ("the Honeymaker" hardtail) around the parking lot for a few minutes. It felt great, snappy acceleration, liked the body position it put me in. I'd have no problem riding one of their bikes long term.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Sounds suspect to me.


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

Mullet Honeymaker changed my life! Let the haters hate. LOL they just don't know what they're missing.

I'll just say it. Mullet Cycles has created a monster that is the most responsive and balanced bike I've ever ridden. It's so fast and stable yet jumps like a DJ. All bikes I've ever ridden pale in comparison. 

If you want to talk **** or disagree with me but haven't tried one of these bikes yet, well. Here's your sign.


----------



## Picard (Apr 5, 2005)

You guys need to quit with obsession with mullet craze 

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

It's the best handling bike I've ridden. I've had to change the way I interact with my bike by carrying more weight on the front end and when and how I initiate turns.

Basically everything happens with less inputs from me, from turns to jumps and everything else, the bike is like half cocked and ready to go. It bunnyhops like a dream too.

My first ride on the townie trails I took a KOM by 4 seconds.

Is it mixed wheels? The 29er front has a big role in some of the characteristics. Is it Mullet geometry? Yup i think so. I own this bike and put the tape to some of it and there's some non-trendy numbers in there. The numbers dont matter to me - how does it ride?


----------



## MattiThundrrr (Jul 6, 2019)

boostin said:


> the bike is like half cocked and ready to go


Imagine how cocked it would be if they were _both the same size!_

lol not bashing mullets, it's just that the joke was so irresistible!
I like the e stays too, how short is that CS measurement? It looks like the chainring overlaps the rear tire! That's only gonna add to the snappiness


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

MattiThundrrr said:


> Imagine how cocked it would be if they were _both the same size!_
> 
> lol not bashing mullets, it's just that the joke was so irresistible!
> I like the e stays too, how short is that CS measurement? It looks like the chainring overlaps the rear tire! That's only gonna add to the snappiness


Ha, if the back wheel was bigger I couldn't tuck it so nice! 

Chainstay length is actually pretty standard when compared to other bikes. That chainring is 36t also, it's a tad bigger than 'standard'. I'm still adjusting my riding style and working out the nuances. 

Cheers dude!


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

BansheeRune said:


> The early days of Cannondale come to mind...


Ventana made a mullet specific frame too. I swapped bikes with Sherwood(owner of Ventana) at Mammoth and didn't care for the 29" front wheel. I don't like 29er anyway but am forced to own one so there's that too.


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

milehi said:


> Ventana made a mullet specific frame too. I swapped bikes with Sherwood(owner of Ventana) at Mammoth and didn't care for the 29" front wheel. I don't like 29er anyway but am forced to own one so there's that too.


Sunspot said f u c k 29, I like my 3.0's too much! I'll admit, I haven't tried a 29 x 3 up front tho...Yet!


----------



## stripes (Sep 6, 2016)

milehi said:


> Ventana made a mullet specific frame too. I swapped bikes with Sherwood(owner of Ventana) at Mammoth and didn't care for the 29" front wheel. I don't like 29er anyway but am forced to own one so there's that too.


Yeah but it was weird. 120mm 29er front, 150mm 26in rear or something like that.


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

stripes said:


> Yeah but it was weird. 120mm 29er front, 150mm 26in rear or something like that.


I think it was 140 in the back using the Ciclon rockers, like the ones I bought from you ages ago. Unbalanced in so many ways.


----------



## stripes (Sep 6, 2016)

milehi said:


> I think it was 140 in the back using the Ciclon rockers, like the ones I bought from you ages ago. Unbalanced in so many ways.


that was an understatement. Forgot you bought them from me


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

stripes said:


> that was an understatement. Forgot you bought them from me


And an Easton stem too


----------



## stripes (Sep 6, 2016)

milehi said:


> And an Easton stem too


Wow, that was a long time ago. I can't remember the last time I had an Easton stem.


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

Mandatory for this thread and showing my age.


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

Banshee...I'm a total triglodyte.


----------



## speedygz (May 12, 2020)

I run my 650B as both. Depending on my mood, or terrain. Or whether I feel like tinkering. Use different forks with axle to crown about 15mm difference, so pretty much preserves designed geometry. The Mullet is definitely a bit more reluctant to turn/tighten its line for sure. Loses that "big BMX" feel. Which is why I like my 650B


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

Speedy's in the cheatin mood!!  
That bike is plenty pithy and needs to spin some singletrack really, really bad...😁


----------



## Curveball (Aug 10, 2015)

milehi said:


> I don't like 29er anyway but *am forced to own* one so there's that too.


What? Why are you forced to own a 29er?


----------



## stiingya (Apr 30, 2004)

Curveball said:


> What? Why are you forced to own a 29er?


Because marketing obviously...


----------



## speedygz (May 12, 2020)

BansheeRune said:


> Speedy's in the cheatin mood!!
> That bike is plenty pithy and needs to spin some singletrack really, really bad...😁


Ha ha. Yeah, it's just a really good fun ride. Got a nice zingy springy feel to it -which I think is down to the light Carbon riser bars, and sleeved down from 31.6 to 27.2 Carbon seat post. Silicone foam grips and a properly sized/fitted seat helps too. As well as the lightweight crank. All good fun. Make that great fun


----------



## BansheeRune (Nov 27, 2011)

speedygz said:


> Ha ha. Yeah, it's just a really good fun ride. Got a nice zingy springy feel to it -which I think is down to the light Carbon riser bars, and sleeved down from 31.6 to 27.2 Carbon seat post. Silicone foam grips and a properly sized/fitted seat helps too. As well as the lightweight crank. All good fun. Make that great fun


All I can say is, I would love a couple hours with that bike on some twisty, turny singltrack. Looks awesome!


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

Haven’t checked into this thread in a while. Mullets are still dumb.

Carry on.


----------



## speedygz (May 12, 2020)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Haven’t checked into this thread in a while. Mullets are still dumb.
> 
> Carry on.


Said the single speeder.


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

This bike is so much fun to ride, I can't put it into words effectively.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

speedygz said:


> Said the single speeder.


That’s a very random assumption to make…


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> That’s a very random assumption to make…


So is your assumption that Mullets are dumb. Might I suggest taking short naps or micro-dosing silly sybin for your mental health?


----------



## speedygz (May 12, 2020)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> That’s a very random assumption to make…


So who is this then -your twin brother with the same name? What bikes / riding other than MTB do you enjoy? That's weak. Really really weak.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

speedygz said:


> So who is this then -your twin brother with the same name? What bikes / riding other than MTB do you enjoy? That's weak. Really really weak.


Yea it was a joke.


----------



## stiingya (Apr 30, 2004)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> Yea it was a joke.


Sorry, It's only a joke if someone other then yourself thinks it's funny.




That was also a joke...


----------



## stiingya (Apr 30, 2004)

boostin said:


> View attachment 1993977
> 
> 
> 
> This bike is so much fun to ride, I can't put it into words effectively.












I think that looks sweet right there!! Wasn't there a Mantis flying V frame from way back when like this with elevated stays?

Speaking of, how are those rear stays? Seems pretty stout in the rear?  Always that balance when it comes to HT rear ends of being strong enough without beating you to death...

Still, I wouldn't have been able to get past their marketing/sizing/lack of geometry spec's thing. (assuming they are still doing that?)


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

My experience with mullets (hardtails). They absolutely have their place on steep and fast terrain. Anything that's slower, or flatter, a 29er is faster. 

I am 5'11" and the exta clearance to a 27.5 wheel is nice in some situations.


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

stiingya said:


> View attachment 1994044
> 
> 
> I think that looks sweet right there!! Wasn't there a Mantis flying V frame from way back when like this with elevated stays?
> ...


The rear end is plenty stiff! The front end is also stiff. I've got to soften up the fork some as I'm not getting full travel.

Miles is still keeping the numbers close. I would never have considered this except I was in Boise and met Miles shuttling bikes. I went to Mullet HQ and parking lot tested a bunch of his bikes. After that, it was pretty obvious these bikes are onto something. It is so poppy and also turny. It accelerates and rolls over stuff. I'm still adjusting my riding habits to this new bike. It's wild how different it rides.

Miles is a dirtbag mtb lifer who makes a living off the industry. He funded Mullet Cycles with his bike accessories company, selling 10 dollar widgets. His ideas are sound and so are his bikes! It was easy to send him funds cause I love supporting the lifer dirtbags with good ideas.

Cheers


----------



## Dan Zulu (Jul 5, 2008)

I have two tires on my front rim and no tire on my rear rim.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

Haters or not, I’m in the process of picking up a mullet wheelset to try with my Ziggy Link on my Druid.

Finally found my belated Father’s Day gift. It’s a little more expensive than the usual 6 pack of craft ales, but maybe that will teach my daughter to not miss it again.

I started a thread on it. Anyone with any experience on Next R wheels with Vault hubs, your comments would be most appreciated.









Next R Wheels


Hello everyone. I can snap up a 35 id 29 front wheel, and a 30 id 27.5 rear, to try running a mullet wheelset on my Druid with the Ziggy Link. No experience with the wheels, including the Vault hub. I have only been running We Are One wheels with DT Swiss hubs since 2015. I plan to run a...




www.mtbr.com


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

Mullet Cycles has their own wheelsets that aren't for sale on the internet - the rims are all 35mm ID and it's pretty amazing with 2.5r/2.5f.


----------



## mtnbkrmike (Mar 26, 2015)

boostin said:


> Mullet Cycles has their own wheelsets that aren't for sale on the internet - the rims are all 35mm ID and it's pretty amazing with 2.5r/2.5f.


🤔

So that’s the magic sauce? And anything other than that is not so magic?

Just about to launch into episode 2 of The Most Hated Man on the Internet. Something tells me I should have maybe steered clear of this thread.


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

Well I'd say he would sell them if you called but he hasn't gotten around to putting them online, they're probably mostly for his frames.


----------



## rideit (Jan 22, 2004)

Dan Zulu said:


> I have two tires on my front rim and no tire on my rear rim.


Well then, tell your wife it’s time for you to retire.


----------



## boostin (Apr 21, 2008)

Wait another ride on the Mullet and another ride taking KOMs on the local laps?? What is this world coming to? This isn't a craze... it's badass!


----------

