I like 29+ bikes. they seem to work for me.
but, mine weights a load, like me I suppose. it is a surly ecr.
I was gonna sell it and buy something lighter, but I cant seem to find anything.

idea's greatly appreciated.

Travers Russ Ti is available in a 29+ version. Jim Barrow has one and it looked really nicely made.

I've reviewed a Travers, very nice bike.

Trek Stache 9.7, weighs under 29lbs

Bikepacking.com produced a handy reference list:

https://bikepacking.com/index/29-plus-bikes/

Custom Ti Stooge?

So far I’ve stuck to 29+ at the front only, because that’s where I think most of the benefit lies. Cuts down a little on weight and (at least psychologically) on drag.

Charliecres wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:34 pm Cuts down a little on weight and (at least psychologically) on drag.

As boring as it sounds, but it depends... doesn't it. Well at least for rolling resistance (not weight).

My slowest bike in rolling must be the ssp trail bike with 2.9 x 2.35" front and 27.5 x 2.8" rear, both tyres soft compound Magic Mary from Schwalbe, with usually about 1.75 bar front and 1.35 bar rear. Rolls slower than my fatbike at 0.5 bar front rear with just about any tyre I can think of.

My second fastest bike runs on 2.6" Vittoria Mezcal, mostly with about 1.6 - 1.8 front and rear.

I'd say it depends more on rubber compound and tread, then also pressure than tyre width.

The inertia of chunky 29+ alloy rims and a 29 x 3" tyre is huge. With that you can turn a light, nimble feeling frame into a dead horse.
Throw on carbon rims and 2.6" tyres and frames like the Stache are playful, not a hand full.
How often have I heared/read "with the heavy wheels I can tractor over just about anything"? This not just goes against the laws of physics we can feel and experience ourselves but alsoto me seems a mere way to say "hey, my bike is okay".
Of course it is, but even just 200 g per wheel less make riding rough stuff much easier. Also under braking and acceleration you'll notice a difference. The list goes on.

My advice when looking for a light weight 29+ bike.
Make sure the wheels don't drag you down the rabbit hole and the dirt wizard doesn't do his 60 tpi magic on you.
The frame will add to overall weight, but have much less impact on how the bike rides then the wheels.

That said,

Nordest Sardinha
Steel, similar specs to a Krampus, but about 400 g lighter... never rode one and can imagine it to be a bit soft for hard and above average weight riders, especially with luggage.

My advice when looking for a light weight 29+ bike.
Make sure the wheels don't drag you down the rabbit hole and the dirt wizard doesn't do his 60 tpi magic on you.
The frame will add to overall weight, but have much less impact on how the bike rides then the wheels.

I have just emailed a good bike shop, about the cost of some lighter wheels for the ecr. I know the frame is quite hefty, but not overly I suppose when it has to carry a 130 kgs rider. which it does very well.

the Alex md40 wheels it came with, shop with chronicles and heavy tubes weigh a fair lump.
I feel lighter wheels and tubeless may be the way forward.

Charliecres wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:31 pm Custom Ti Stooge?

This. I'd considered selling mine many times but can't bring myself to do so. I'm looking at alternative setups for it now though as it's really only getting used as a singlespeed commuter / fun bike now.

Alpinum wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:17 pm That said,

Nordest Sardinha
Steel, similar specs to a Krampus, but about 400 g lighter... never rode one and can imagine it to be a bit soft for hard and above average weight riders, especially with luggage.

I have a sardinha, its nice. Stiffer than a Salsa El Mar. Frame is quite heavy at 2.8kg for the ML. Only takes a 29x26 tyre in the back.

How about a Carver Gnarvester? Silly name, had one and it was a nice bike.

For wheels, you could get some lightbicycle carbon rims on some hope hubs, go tubeless 2.6 mezcal rear and stick with 3.0 front. Stick a carbon fork on.

That would make a difference.

Light weight is over rated. I could have laid out 5K on a Ti Jones plus frame but instead laid 1.5k out on a steel frame (which was painfull enough) The Ti frame would have save about 1kg. The steepest slope you are riding up is about 15-20% so when you do the vectors a 1kg saving equals about 250 grams less pulling you back down the hill. This is not going to be noticeable.

So other than carrying it or lifting over fences, the weight saving is irrelevant. Which is no reason not to buy Ti bike of course as they look so good but they won't save you much energy or make you any quicker.

I'm looking at Ti fat bike frames at the mo but this is based on want, not need.

Alpinum wrote: ↑Thu Jul 25, 2019 1:17 pm The inertia of chunky 29+ alloy rims and a 29 x 3" tyre is huge. With that you can turn a light, nimble feeling frame into a dead horse.
Throw on carbon rims and 2.6" tyres and frames like the Stache are playful, not a hand full.
How often have I heared/read "with the heavy wheels I can tractor over just about anything"? This not just goes against the laws of physics we can feel and experience ourselves but alsoto me seems a mere way to say "hey, my bike is okay".
Of course it is, but even just 200 g per wheel less make riding rough stuff much easier. Also under braking and acceleration you'll notice a difference. The list goes on.

It’s the sheer size of the 29+ platform that makes it tractor over things. That combined with the huge footprint and ability to run lower pressures than narrower tyres.
The rolling inertia of a bigger heavier wheel is also in it’s favour when it comes to bashing along trails.
Did you ever try and stop a flywheel quickly?

Ton, Alex Pilkington who went fastest/won/finished first on the Dales Divide rides a lightweight 29+ I think he designs or imports them himself.
He had them specc’d with Light Bicycle carbon rims SRAM Eagle and s bunch of other trick stuff.
I don’t remember what brand they are sold under sorry but they look pretty mint.
EDIT: It’s called a Fatster and weighs 9.8kg with Chupacabra 29x3 tyres

lune ranger wrote: ↑Fri Jul 26, 2019 12:03 am It’s the sheer size of the 29+ platform that makes it tractor over things

Of course it is.
Nobody in this thread is argueing against the benefits and what makes them tractor over stuff.
My post was all just about minimising the down sides of 29+ - weight.

There's perhaps nothing that carries weight (rider and luggage) more efficiently overall over rough ground than a bike with big, low pressure, only moderately burly tyres - apart from good suspension. The heavier wheels need more energy to accelerate but heavier loaded bikes aren't accelerated easily anyway. It's more of a momentum and average speed thing for most of us and you'll either wear yourself down or need great fitness to repeatedly accelerate a loaded bike fast over a long ride. A very non-scientific punt says that though a lighter wheel saves input energy, overall ability to hold momentum and maintain speed is worth more than the added energy needed to accelerate/pedal the heavier wheel uphill. Add a load to the bike and I know which way I'd go for my own bike spec. A carbon 45-50mm rim and the right 2.8-3" tyre might be the most effective wheel for a moderate to heavier-loaded bike.

It's more worthwhile spending on lighter rims as the wheels get bigger since big wheels rotate slower at a given speed then smaller ones, so where the weight is in relation to the axle cancels out and weight is the only thing left in the maths that relate to momentum or acceleration (outside of tyre roll-over, pressures etc - all done on feel since numbers there are way too complex for me). Possibly the main area I'm looking at weight-savings on my next bike build.

Given Tony's size (which he alluded to in his original post) super light rims and tyres might not be his best option.

But having said that, putting lighter tyres on a bike does make a big difference - my commuter with Schwalbe Marathons feels very sluggish. Put lighter tyres on, such as Bontrager R2s, and it's much more sprightly. Of course I lose that near indestructible quality of the Marathons.

I did commute on the fat bike a few time just for a laugh and you'd have to drop quite a few gears when going round canal bridges so you didn't have to put as much effort into getting back up to speed.

whitestone wrote: ↑Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:31 am Given Tony's size (which he alluded to in his original post) super light rims and tyres might not be his best option.

A lightbicycle i45 mm is rather light for its width, but I'm sure it'd be just fine.

I have a few LB rims, all i30 mm at 420 g and 460 g (all 29"), some with only 28 h and light, double butted spokes, others with regular db spokes and have been trying to give them a hard time, but they never came undone. I've cracked rear triangles and destroyed tyres, but the rims where just fine.

Once I hit a sharp rock ledge when going proper bonkers close to the end of a descent. The rock snapped 4 spokes, damaged a few more and the rim had a soft spot of about 2 x 2 mm. The rim was still true and I was able to ride on! Although not necessary, a friend mended the soft spot and the rim is enjoying more riding.
I used to get the same experience with my DH bikes. Yet here we're talking 600 - 700 g rims at 26" with 36 spokes and once the alloy rim is broken you rarely can mend it. With carbon you often can.

LB also have a crash replacement. So when looking into the financial side, a RaceFace, Stans, Surly etc. alloy rim isn't that much cheaper.

Alpinum wrote: ↑Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:55 pm

whitestone wrote: ↑Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:31 am Given Tony's size (which he alluded to in his original post) super light rims and tyres might not be his best option.

A lightbicycle i45 mm is rather light for its width, but I'm sure it'd be just fine.

I have a few LB rims, all i30 mm at 420 g and 460 g (all 29"), some with only 28 h and light, double butted spokes, others with regular db spokes and have been trying to give them a hard time, but they never came undone. I've cracked rear triangles and destroyed tyres, but the rims where just fine.

Once I hit a sharp rock ledge when going proper bonkers close to the end of a descent. The rock snapped 4 spokes, damaged a few more and the rim had a soft spot of about 2 x 2 mm. The rim was still true and I was able to ride on! Although not necessary, a friend mended the soft spot and the rim is enjoying more riding.
I used to get the same experience with my DH bikes. Yet here we're talking 600 - 700 g rims at 26" with 36 spokes and once the alloy rim is broken you rarely can mend it. With carbon you often can.

LB also have a crash replacement. So when looking into the financial side, a RaceFace, Stans, Surly etc. alloy rim isn't that much cheaper.

Good info there cheers! I was looking at their website the other day and contemplating entering the dark side that is carbon fibre. May have to give them a go now.....

Ive also had some LB rims for ages. No issues at all.

htrider wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2019 1:48 pm Good info there cheers! I was looking at their website the other day and contemplating entering the dark side that is carbon fibre. May have to give them a go now.....

Biggest downsides are Chinese labour, long distance shipment and the fuss in a case of replacement/warranty. When I damaged the rim that one time, LB handled the issue very professionally. Absolutely nothing to complain about their customer service - so the fuss I feared was unfounded.
Just remember that your bike will feel harsher and less compliant, which often translates into less grip. On the other hand you get more feedback and feel the loss of grip better. The transition between grip and sliding is more pronounced and likely a bit earlier with stiffer wheel. I like the feeling and think I can respond easier and quicker when riding at the limit, but some see it differently.