# Thoughts on new Kona



## Singletrackshred (Sep 2, 2019)

Morning All, 


I was thinking of getting a new bike this fall, and prefer mtb geometry so the 2020 Unit X seemed to fit the bill (though I would have preferred a better group set). The only issue holding me back is the minimal distance between the rear tire and seat tube... looks like the only way around this is to put 2.4’s on it or the grit and grime accumulation would wear the paint fairly quickly! Thoughts??


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

It does have adjustable dropouts so you could just adjust it back a bit in the dropouts.


----------



## Singletrackshred (Sep 2, 2019)

Good point, thanks... but I wonder if that would be enough (if you blow up the second pic it looks like they are centered with not much room to move back).


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

I've seen one in person and can confirm the tire clearance is tight with the stock 2.6" tire. There is plenty of room to move back though. A 2.4-2.5 would also give more clearance, like a WT tire that has shorter sidewalls compared to the stock tire. 

If you like the bike I wouldn't let this stop you. It's a minor detail, not a deal breaker.


----------



## Skeeno (Jan 14, 2009)

Put some vinyl wrap/clear bra there to protect the paint?

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Skeeno said:


> Put some vinyl wrap/clear bra there to protect the paint?


Yup. That's what I would do.

I don't see the problem as long as you are happy running tires the same size or smaller than the stock rubber.


----------



## bakerjw (Oct 8, 2014)

Is this mainly for bikepacking?

The reason that I ask is that so many "racy" mountain bike frames have such small frame triangles. I love nothing more than having a huge triangle down there for a good sized frame bag.

If I didn't already have my Firetower and was in the market for a new BP rig, I'd get a custom chromoly frame and part it together myself. Different skillsets I suppose.


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

I wouldn't call a Kona Unit a racy frame. Kona advertises it as a bikepacking bike.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

93EXCivic said:


> I wouldn't call a Kona Unit a racy frame. Kona advertises it as a bikepacking bike.


Yes. The fact you can fit a water bottle on the seattube lets you know it has decent frame bag space. The really aggressively low slung hardtails definitely can't do that.


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

Singletrackshred said:


> Morning All,
> 
> I was thinking of getting a new bike this fall, and prefer mtb geometry so the 2020 Unit X seemed to fit the bill (though I would have preferred a better group set). The only issue holding me back is the minimal distance between the rear tire and seat tube... looks like the only way around this is to put 2.4's on it or the grit and grime accumulation would wear the paint fairly quickly! Thoughts??


I think like you. If I had any notion to ride beyond the forecast in these times of erratic weather, I would pass on it. Too many other options with clearance.


----------



## Moof123 (Jul 1, 2019)

The battle to get the absolute smallest chainstay length baffles me, and leads to dumb-assery like this. I am sure there is merit to the claim that it matters to handling/climbing, but I would be shocked if someone on a loaded up bikepacking rig could tell the difference of 20 or even 30 mm longer chainstay.

As a 2018 Unit-X owner I'd advise you to also look at either a Surly Krampus/ECR, or a Marin Pine Mountain.

After all I did to my bike to get happy with it, I'd probably start from the frame up if I had to do it again. I hated the 1x11 drivetrain it came with, so it is now 2x11 with Shimano shifters/derailleurs/crankset, but with the SRAM 11/42 cassete. The flat bar was replaced with a butterfly bar (Jones Bar would probably been even better). The seat is a Brooks Cambium. The brakes are underwhelming and will be replaced someday. The 27.5+ wheels are just fine, but I have 29+ envy and can't justify the cost. So on and so-forth.

A Krampus frame with a 2x10 M6000 groupset and 29+ wheels/tires would kind of be a better rig for me in hindsight. YMMV.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Shame, it would have been fairly easy to put a little bend in the seat post tube.

As to how helpful is having a shorter chainstay ... it is better for handling and traction, probably more so on a bike used for packing, slow tech, etc...


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Moof123 said:


> I am sure there is merit to the claim that it matters to handling/climbing, but I would be shocked if someone on a loaded up bikepacking rig could tell the difference of 20 or even 30 mm longer chainstay.


I would expect that would be a very easy difference to spot from the saddle all other things being equal. 20-30mm is a huge change to CS length.

And the CS length on that bike is 430mm which is not particularly short for a hardtail 29er. I'd call that long personally. I built a HT with 424mm CS that fits a 29 x 2.6" tire [with more clearance than show in the OP's photo] and I didn't push the envelope particularly hard.

You'd gain ~0.25" more clearance if you slide those CS adjusters all the way to the back. At that point I don't see what the issue is if you are good with tires the size that come stock on the bike. The only thing that will stop you is death mud and that'll plug up both ends of the bike regardless of how much room there is to the back of the seattube.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

So this design would handle badly?


----------



## bakerjw (Oct 8, 2014)

I just noticed that there are 2 pics in the OP which points out something that I've noticed in geometry differences between frame sizes.

In the bottom picture, the line of the top tube and the seat stays is very straight. In the top picture, there is a greater angle which opens the frame triangle up quite a bit.

Bikepacking is such a great experience and is so personal on how we assemble our rides and gear. I've found that there are no truly "Right" answers but based on my experiences, I highly value that frame triangle space.


----------



## Moof123 (Jul 1, 2019)

Unicycle bikepacking is the logical next step in short chainstay designs.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

I think the adjustable chainstays on the Kona are a great idea. Most people don't bikepack professionally so their "touring" bike is likely to see more use unloaded at home than it is adventure travel. Even when touring there is a big difference between grinding gravel down a GDR-esque route and technical singletrack. Being able to adjust how your bike rides in 2mins with a 5mm hex key is pretty nice. The ~1" of adjustment on that Kona will noticeably affect how it feels when you ride it.

As far as what CS length is best that's not a question you can answer in a general sense. It's going to vary from rider to rider and bike to bike as there are so many variables. Presumably each person figures out what they want/enjoy/works for them and then buys a bike to match. If you like the bike you are riding and it works for you that's great.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

bakerjw said:


> Is this mainly for bikepacking?
> 
> The reason that I ask is that so many "racy" mountain bike frames have such small frame triangles. I love nothing more than having a huge triangle down there for a good sized frame bag.
> 
> If I didn't already have my Firetower and was in the market for a new BP rig, I'd get a custom chromoly frame and part it together myself. Different skillsets I suppose.


Get a Coconino... Steve is still building them. Forever bikes...

https://coconinocycles.blogspot.com/


----------



## bakerjw (Oct 8, 2014)

bsieb said:


> Get a Coconino... Steve is still building them. Forever bikes...


Very fine looking bikes...


----------



## nowhereyonder (Nov 29, 2016)

bsieb said:


> So this design would handle badly?


I want a klunksplosion fork bad.


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

Marin PMO-
Just a bit over 2 years on mine and it's been a very good change. 
They all show a cs of 437 and the bike feels roomy and comfortable without feeling big. Bikepacking is pretty easy and the rig has room for bags and add on's that make it simple. I didn't want a racy agro bike nor bitchin speeds on the trails so it's delivered what I expected with some stability and traction I've really come to appreciate. 

My only impressions / experience with Kona goes back to the early 2000's. I still have the medium alu h/t but I can tell you at least for those times, they were cramped, tight and short-reached for anything of comparable size labels. I felt like it worked fine for a time but I learned as I went and later realized comfort and ride positioning weren't ideal. I was able to fix it with seat / post options and a longer stem and got many years out of it as the primary bike. No comparison to the right fit and feel though. 
The newer bikes and geo have likely stretched things out a bit.

I think is a great point previous mentions discuss frame size for bags versus a tighter racy frame angle. The b-packer set ups are a bit more upright and you'd have to see where or what you want to compromise on if you still flirt with 'racy' and want an all duty bike.


----------



## eri (Sep 4, 2012)

Moof123 said:


> The battle to get the absolute smallest chainstay length baffles me, and leads to dumb-assery like this. I am sure there is merit to the claim that it matters to handling/climbing, but I would be shocked if someone on a loaded up bikepacking rig could tell the difference of 20 or even 30 mm longer chainstay.


Well then be shocked, in that range with that seat angle i can totally tell a difference of a cm. Matters every time ive had to hoist the front wheel. Short chainstays rule for handling.

As others have noted what isnt great is the tire seattube clearance. Wish they'd done something to improve that. In thick mud that wheel will stop turning and youll be dragging the bike.

PS: I think that bike looks hawt.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

^I rarely "hoist the front wheel" while bikepacking, but maybe that's just me? A loaded packing bike isn't that nimble anyhow, and the longer chain stays give a nicer loaded ride based on my playing with horizontal drop out/axle positioning.


----------



## eri (Sep 4, 2012)

bsieb said:


> ^I rarely "hoist the front wheel" while bikepacking, but maybe that's just me? A loaded packing bike isn't that nimble anyhow, and the longer chain stays give a nicer loaded ride based on my playing with horizontal drop out/axle positioning.


Yeah, different strokes. I was quite often lifting the front over stuff while loaded. Rocks, holes, steps, ditches, bad stuff I can't roll over. And I get the willies when chainstays get longer than around 430mm. Drives me nuts. I get angry like "who would build a bike like this!?"

I haven't found longer chainstays to give a perceptibly better ride when I'm using mtb tires, for me the tire deflection utterly dominates. And I'm standing a lot if it's rough. I really like that short chain stays give tighter tracking between front and rear wheel, which helps me stay on the trail.

So, except for mud clearance (and heel clearance with panniers) I'm a vicious proponent of short stays. If there's some evil conspiracy to promulgate them then consider me a victim: I've fallen hook and the sinker for this fad. I drewl when I see a bent seat tube or some clearance mitigation.

Caveat: I've never ridden a 29er with less than 410mm, and I believe there is such a thing as too short, but even at 410 Ive never looped out, just great traction and easier manualing.


----------



## She&I (Jan 4, 2010)

bsieb said:


> ^I rarely "hoist the front wheel" while bikepacking, but maybe that's just me? A loaded packing bike isn't that nimble anyhow, and the longer chain stays give a nicer loaded ride based on my playing with horizontal drop out/axle positioning.


Bikepacking can still be full-on mountain biking, lofting the front wheel is as important as any other time. More so to my thinking. I'll happily smash rocks when my bike doesn't need to last for days or weeks. Otherwise I'll take that terrain lightly with lofts/unweighting. Going slow to roll every square edge is beat - the CT and AZT will work you and your bike. Smooth surfaces, no need to care.

Agreed, vik, when the mud is bad there is no bike that will work. Or shoes, even. You've been in almost-muddy conditions where your tires consistently pick up a sticky layer and pebbles. I wouldn't want to think about that every time I saw dark clouds. Too many traumatic memories.


----------



## Funoutside (Jul 17, 2019)

2020 Pine Mountain from the looks of things don't come with the rigid fork option anymore, which for many is more useful for biking packing.


----------



## Jake January (Sep 12, 2014)

Moof123 said:


> The battle to get the absolute smallest chainstay length baffles me, and leads to dumb-assery like this. I am sure there is merit to the claim that it matters to handling/climbing, but I would be shocked if someone on a loaded up bikepacking rig could tell the difference of 20 or even 30 mm longer chainstay.
> 
> As a 2018 Unit-X owner I'd advise you to also look at either a Surly Krampus/ECR, or a Marin Pine Mountain.
> 
> ...


Yep, if shopping for a 29+, an ECR should get careful consideration.
I almost bought one but landed a Troll instead because the 26x2.5 tyres were quite adequate for my all-around the world bike-packing needs...
No regrets and I'm on my second set of tyres.

That said even the venerable LHT is actually old school MTB geometry and performs great on trails with fatter tyres. There's room for 26x2.35 Big Apples.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Jake January said:


> That said even the venerable LHT is actually old school MTB geometry and performs great on trails with fatter tyres. There's room for 26x2.35 Big Apples.


I have a 26er LHT even with bigger tires that BB is really low for actual trails. I would be scared shitless riding that on geo on any trails around here. Dirt roads would be fine if that was your jam.


----------



## bachman1961 (Oct 9, 2013)

Funoutside said:


> 2020 Pine Mountain from the looks of things don't come with the rigid fork option anymore, which for many is more useful for biking packing.


29' X 2.6 now as PM1 or PM2 from what I see.


----------



## Funoutside (Jul 17, 2019)

Ah didn't realize they went from 27.5+ to 29 also. Just saw that on their site no more rigid fork option.


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

bsieb said:


> ^I rarely "hoist the front wheel" while bikepacking, but maybe that's just me? A loaded packing bike isn't that nimble anyhow, and the longer chain stays give a nicer loaded ride based on my playing with horizontal drop out/axle positioning.


That is fair enough but I feel like the Kona Unit is built as a bike that is easily capable enough for bikepacking but can still feel fun when not loaded. Rather then an out and out touring bike.


----------



## bsieb (Aug 23, 2003)

93EXCivic said:


> That is fair enough but I feel like the Kona Unit is built as a bike that is easily capable enough for bikepacking but can still feel fun when not loaded. Rather then an out and out touring bike.


My bike is pretty nimble, but with a loaded frame pack and ~8 lbs. in the bar bag the front end doesn't respond all that well to me picking it up. Also, center of gravity (COG) isn't entirely dependent on chainstay length, there are other factors involved, such as seat and head tube angles, amount, if any, of suspension compensation, as well as dimensions and adjustment of various components. The real question is if you can get the desired COG on a particular frame. If you can get it with longer stays it will give you more options. I think the Kona will be great, btw.


----------



## 93EXCivic (Mar 12, 2018)

bsieb said:


> My bike is pretty nimble, but with a loaded frame pack and ~8 lbs. in the bar bag the front end doesn't respond all that well to me picking it up. Also, center of gravity (COG) isn't entirely dependent on chainstay length, there are other factors involved, such as seat and head tube angles, amount, if any, of suspension compensation, as well as dimensions and adjustment of various components. The real question is if you can get the desired COG on a particular frame. If you can get it with longer stays it will give you more options. I think the Kona will be great, btw.


I doubt any bike is going to be particular easy to lift the front end while heavily loaded.

My point was rather that I think the new Unit is built to be more of an "all round" rigid mountain bike that can handle bikepacking like Karate Monkey rather then an out and out bikepacking bike like say a Surly Orge. Part of Kona's designs recently have been fairly short chainstays which in my opinion have help make the ones I have ridden very fun bikes. I think this is a case of Kona make a design compromise to make the Unit more in line with their other MTBs. If you are buying a bike purely for bikepacking it probably isn't the best choice but if you are buying a mountain bike that can do some bikepacking it is probably a great choice.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

93EXCivic said:


> I doubt any bike is going to be particular easy to lift the front end while heavily loaded.












I can't imagine bikepacking on singletrack and not being able to get the front wheel up as needed. That's part of what I love about bikepacking vs. my days of road touring [with way too much gear] where it felt like I was driving a dump truck. 










I look at bikepacking as riding my mountain bike and taking camping gear along....not camping with a mountain bike. If that makes any sense.


----------



## Moof123 (Jul 1, 2019)

93EXCivic said:


> I doubt any bike is going to be particular easy to lift the front end while heavily loaded.
> 
> My point was rather that I think the new Unit is built to be more of an "all round" rigid mountain bike that can handle bikepacking like Karate Monkey rather then an out and out bikepacking bike like say a Surly Orge. Part of Kona's designs recently have been fairly short chainstays which in my opinion have help make the ones I have ridden very fun bikes. I think this is a case of Kona make a design compromise to make the Unit more in line with their other MTBs. If you are buying a bike purely for bikepacking it probably isn't the best choice but if you are buying a mountain bike that can do some bikepacking it is probably a great choice.


Fair enough. My point was that the drive for uber short chainstays results in some real design shenanigans that impacts things like mud clearance, heal clearance to panniers, plus tire clearance, and so on. Given that I don't shred whatsoever, but just bought my 2018 Unit X as an on-sale bikepacking rig, I see the 2020 trading off several things that are important to me in the pursuit of short chain stays that I put little value in. I am definately in the "camping with a mountain bike" category myself. To each his own.

Still waiting for in-hub gearing for unicycle like backends to satisfy y'all short chainstay worshippers (joking...).


----------



## badsneakers (Dec 12, 2015)

I haven’t been able to find any information on if the 2020/2021 frames will fit a large chain ring like a 38T or be able to be converted to a 2X setup. Beyond that the bike hits all the rig spots for me but I have a need for a little more speed..


----------

