# Making Niner Air 9 carbon into road bike



## icaruswings (Apr 27, 2010)

I am having a hard time trying to find a road bike with a low-standover because of my short legs in relation to body height (29.5 w/shoes, 6 ft tall). So I was considering converting a high-end 29er with (by road standards) a very low standover and putting road shifters and components on it. Here is what I am thinking:

Niner Air 9 Carbon 29er frame w/ rigid carbon niner fork
Chris King/hope hubs laced to road rims w/ disc brakes
SRAM Rival/Force group
SRAM BB7 road disc calipers
SRAM XX mountain bike crank (as large as I can get it)

The rest would be standard road bike stuff, drop bars, look pedals, etc etc.

My only concerns are wind resistance and general handling. Because the wheel wells are meant for huge tires and I would be running 25c's at most I dont know if there would be a lot of turbulence being created. 

What do you guys think?


----------



## ksm279 (Dec 23, 2007)

You could go for a compact geometry frame with a sloping top tube, if stand over height is the only issue....


----------



## icaruswings (Apr 27, 2010)

I have looked at all the major brands (and some not so major) and I am a good 1" under the minimum of most bikes in my size range. I really dont want any "man accidents" dismounting as I have almost had in the past with normal sized compact road bikes.


----------



## phlegm2 (Apr 10, 2012)

Sounds like you are going farther than me since I just threw on some road tires on a 26-inch MTB (carbon Epic), but I absolutely could not keep up on a 30km run years ago.

Assuming road gearing is matched, you're still at a disadvantage in terms of seating position, and to a lesser extent the frame aero.

I'd try to find a road frame that fits.


----------



## icaruswings (Apr 27, 2010)

Disc brakes and QR 15 are coming to road bikes so it would be like a road bike from the future  I do think having a QR15 up front would yield a very stiff front-end for control on turns and descents. But seriously, my only other options at this point are women's-specific models with sloping top-tubes.


----------



## ssphoenix (Oct 20, 2011)

I am no expert other then going to extreme length to understand road bike fitting coming from 4 years of racing mtbs. I've done what you are doing now and i can tell you being extremely fit, you will not keep up on long rides. You will always in disadvantage depending on what your goals are. However, in my opinion short legs and long torso is irrelevant. You still need to be able to reach the pedals and so you will still be in the 52, 50 frame size. You shouldn't have a problem extending the seat post more then normal. There are plenty of stems configuration to fit your needs. Remember, when you extent your seat post, you will be sitting more towards the rear and so does your CG. 

If you plan on racing, it is just not the same racing a mtb fitted for road. Find a road bike. You are not alone.


----------



## icaruswings (Apr 27, 2010)

Well I am looking for a bike to do centuries or more on, mostly group rides and long-distance supported road touring. So I need something I can sit on and power for a long time, I dont need any fancy time-attack positioning. My biggest concern with the smaller road frames is often I have clearance issues with the front wheel hitting my feet or maxing out the stem length (usually around 140mm) which leads to some handling performance problems.


----------



## phlegm2 (Apr 10, 2012)

ssphoenix said:


> I am no expert other then going to extreme length to understand road bike fitting coming from 4 years of racing mtbs. I've done what you are doing now and i can tell you being extremely fit, you will not keep up on long rides. You will always in disadvantage depending on what your goals are. However, in my opinion short legs and long torso is irrelevant. You still need to be able to reach the pedals and so you will still be in the 52, 50 frame size. You shouldn't have a problem extending the seat post more then normal. There are plenty of stems configuration to fit your needs. Remember, when you extent your seat post, you will be sitting more towards the rear and so does your CG.
> 
> If you plan on racing, it is just not the same racing a mtb fitted for road. Find a road bike. You are not alone.


Well said. I won't profess to being in racing shape at the time, but I easily led my MTB pack. As like Phoenix, no way you can keep up on road. I was embarrassed.

Top tier cyclists are usually small-ish - hope you can find a frame. Lots of folks here who can likely help.


----------



## icaruswings (Apr 27, 2010)

Just for reference this is the bike I am looking to modify: 










Its basically already a road bike except its made for 2.3" tires


----------



## Nater (Feb 7, 2003)

For the amount of money you'll spend on the Air9C, you could have a custom road frame built.


----------



## ssphoenix (Oct 20, 2011)

Very well aware of the air 9 carbon. I ride a flash 29er and at 18.5lb close to what a road bike typically is weight wise, it was only natural to give that a try. I do lots of 12h endurance races and feel very comfortable. But as someone pointed out, i got embarrassed. It is just not the same. Refitting an air 9 for road would be just a waist of money. But please do not take anyone's word. Nothing like learning from your own mistake.


----------



## phlegm2 (Apr 10, 2012)

Was in the same boat as you.

To be specific, my MTB is an '08 Spec S-Works Epic:
Specialized Bicycle Components : S-Works Epic

Seems eerily similar to your nine-er. (Although, I give you you have larger wheels.)

Again, be warned, you are at a disadvantage. Feel free to try though - I did.


----------



## forge55b (Jan 30, 2011)

A Specialized Tarmac doesn't have the standover you need? I'm as extreme as you in terms of long torso, short legs but I'm about an inch off and I had plenty of room on a 56cm Tarmac. I'm on a 56cm Fuji SST and I am pretty much dragging my junk if I'm at a stop but I just sit on the top tube with my leg anyways. Have you actually tried riding any sloping top tube bikes with cleats and all or are you going off of their info sheets?


----------



## Monty Dog (Apr 8, 2004)

The problem with the Niner will be the height of the front end - the fork is over 4cm longer than a regular road fork, so make sure you can make your saddle to bar drop. 29er geometry also tends to be about 5cm longer in the toptube - might be ok for your proportions


----------



## Goodbarsix (Aug 5, 2009)

I don't think standover is that big of a deal honestly. My traditional road frame would make it tough to straddle....but I never do that.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

In the old days, people weren't as obsessed with standover on a road bike. Look at photos of old bikes from the 60s, 70s, 80s - very little seat post exposed. The old rule of thumb was "a fist full of seat post", which translated into very little standover.

I'm not saying a lot of standover is a bad thing, but it's (in my opinion) more of a style thing than functional. Style caused by the way mountain bikes went in the last two decades and road bikes needing to be marketed to people who came up from their youth with those type of frames and looks. They just don't feel comfortable with traditional road bike standover.

On a road bike, you can EASILY get away with 1" or even less standing in your cycling shoes and bike shorts. Having your bike shoes on and your nice snug bike shorts, properly positioned (in other words, having the boys all up high and not dangling) makes a good inch or even two compared to standing in your loafers, boxers and khakis. You could feel "yoweee!" in your street clothes, and feel you're straddling a nice small sporty frame with your kit on.

In fact, you can be perfectly functional and comfortable with a standover that has the top tube just grazing the crotch. That's how my cross frame is with it's high bottom bracket and fat tires. But functionally, when I actually ride the bike, stopping and starting for commuting, the top tube has never entered my mind - in other words, it doesn't touch me.

Most of the time on a road bike - I'll go so far as to say _all the time _except very unusual, infrequent situations - you get off the bike in a very controlled situation, and the bike leans whan you straddle it. You don't bounce off and on the saddle in sudden situations. 

The point being, seriously, straddle your prospective bikes in your bike shorts with your bike shoes before you have any pre-concpetions about standover, and go by traditional road bike standards. If it's just grazing the jewels, it's OK. An inch is a lot. It's not a mountain bike.

All that said, I'm with others who are surprised you can't find a decently sized frame in a compact design. All the major and minor makers have them. You can do a paper search for the degree by just comparing the "effective" or "horizontal" top tube length with either standover or seat tube (make sure you control for c-c or c-t on seat tube though). Maybe you can't find a sloping tube road bike that gives you the INCHES of standover you think you're looking for, but I'll bet you will find one that gives you a minimal reasonalble (in other words, very little!) standover.

Don't give up, but adjust your standards for standover. Good luck, I hope you find a real road bike you like.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Goodbarsix said:


> I don't think standover is that big of a deal honestly. My traditional road frame would make it tough to straddle....but I never do that.


Agreed.
Standover is THE most over-rated fitting but at the same time the one that seems to be considered more than most. I would suggest if you have a cm, you have enough.
It is only of major importance if you spend a heap of time standing over your bike with both feet flat on the ground.
You need to spend more time considering the top tube length and probably stack and reach.
How often do you think you are going to have to suddenly dismount your road bike?
Even on an MTB standover is not a fitting I give a thought to.
The likelihood of you needing to suddenly dismount your MTB while having the dexterity to land evenly on both feet on a flat section of trail in order to save your nuts is minimal to say the least.


----------



## svard75 (Jun 10, 2011)

icaruswings said:


> Just for reference this is the bike I am looking to modify:
> 
> 
> 
> ...












Not too bad.


----------



## IJBcape (May 27, 2011)

Those niners are sweet. I want one for the woods. I have the opposite problem as you, long legs, short torso, but I feel for ya. 

Do whatever works best and fits and you'll love it. If you have the means, you can always get a custom road frame with just the right standover and reach for your body.


----------



## tallywacker (Jan 25, 2012)

Test ride a BMC SL01. BMC's tend to be stretched out more for their sizing. It might be something worth looking into


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

Monty Dog said:


> . 29er geometry also tends to be about 5cm longer in the toptube - might be ok for your proportions


This would be my concern...and adding drop bars will only increase the reach.

You'd have to be measure carefully to determine if it will fit..


My 2 cents: for road bikes, stand over is the most overrated measurement in cycling....It really is useless...
I'm on the shorter side and I have various bikes where my junk touches to top tube...It never comes into play...My suggestion is to get a compact geometry road bike that fits....forget about the standover


----------



## DJT21 (May 22, 2011)

> What do you guys think?


I think you sound like an idiot.

I am struggling to see any logic in what you are proposing. That build would cost thousands, why no just spend it on a custom frame with proper geometry?

I still cant understand why you are so worried about standover height though, just buy a compact frame.


----------



## feeex (Dec 6, 2011)

DJT21 said:


> I think you sound like an idiot.
> 
> I am struggling to see any logic in what you are proposing. That build would cost thousands, why no just spend it on a custom frame with proper geometry?
> 
> I still cant understand why you are so worried about standover height though, just buy a compact frame.


Well said......maybe a bit harsh, but well said.

Honestly, people of all shapes and sizes ride road bikes. You can't tell me that you are so 'special' that there isn't a solution out there. Compact is almost certainly going to work with the right stem, seatpost etc. And if it doesn't work, spend the $1,000's that the hybrid you are building is going to cost on a custom frame. I have fairly short legs but ride a 52cm Tarmac. If my body were longer, all I'd do is change the stem and seatpost.

Seriously, don't waste money on trying to make a mountain bike into a road bike. Road bikes are road bikes and mountain bikes are mountain bikes for many reasons. Getting one to do the job of the other is very very difficult.........


----------



## svard75 (Jun 10, 2011)

DJT21 said:


> I think you sound like an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think this was unnecessarily harsh. The OP has short legs but a long torso and he said he's looked at all the major brands already. How much does a custom frame build cost? I can find a niner air frame used off ebay for $1200. 

Assuming the OPs measurements fit the geo I think the real issue with doing this would be the aerodynamics, the looks, the crank arm clearance and the weight of the niner air frame.

The niner carbon fork has a really wide arch for 2.3s I think you can squeeze a 2.4 in there as well. From 60.96mm to 28mm you're leaving gaps of 16.48mm on each side front and back. That is both ugly IMO and drag prone.

Putting a frame like this closer to the ground could propose an issue with pedals being much closer to the ground during cornering but it depends on size.

Weight would be my biggest concern. I believe the frame alone is just slightly under 3lbs ~1315g. Plus the weight of the larger hubs, discs and bb7 calipers? It would be a pretty hefty ride for the distances your talking and in a group!

Sent using my retarded blackberry


----------



## svard75 (Jun 10, 2011)

FTR said:


> Agreed.
> Standover is THE most over-rated fitting but at the same time the one that seems to be considered more than most. I would suggest if you have a cm, you have enough.
> It is only of major importance if you spend a heap of time standing over your bike with both feet flat on the ground.
> You need to spend more time considering the top tube length and probably stack and reach.
> ...


Wow, have you ever ridden a MTB on anything greater than flat? Think about a steep climb and loosing your balance or a steep descent and the front catching a rock. I would not want to ride a MTB without worrying about clearance.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Yep. MTBer. 
Stand 100% by what I said.
If you can land on 2 feet in the circumstances you describe post it on Youtube as I want to see it.
In all the crashes or step off's I have ever had this has not been the case.
In fact you will be lucky to get one foot out and on the ground in an emergency dismount.


----------



## svard75 (Jun 10, 2011)

FTR said:


> Yep. MTBer.
> Stand 100% by what I said.
> If you can land on 2 feet in the circumstances you describe post it on Youtube as I want to see it.
> In all the crashes or step off's I have ever had this has not been the case.
> In fact you will be lucky to get one foot out and on the ground in an emergency dismount.


LOL so each time you emergency dismount you crash?! I have been MTBing for a few years now with clipless pedals and have only really fallen a handfull of times due to mud buildup in the cleat and the clip not releasing quickly enough. Every other time I dismount with at least one foot or two. Regardless if you speak to most mountain bikers they would agree standover IS important in that sport. Not so much in road riding. I have a Large frame cross bike and my boys are right there is I stand on the ground. Not too concerning.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Not sure what you are reading but not what I typed.
I said you are unlikely to unclip both feet in an emergency dismount. 
I also did not say it was completely unimportant. I said it was the least important.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

I'm 5'11" with a 29" inseam.
I can ride a Scott CR-1 in size 56. In fact, there aren't many bikes in the 54-56 range that I can't ride. Of course, I understand that my junk touching the top tube means nothing on a road bike...

I think the OP is worshipping the great gods Testi Cleez and thinks they are untouchable. It really isn't an issue, dude.


----------



## svard75 (Jun 10, 2011)

FTR said:


> Not sure what you are reading but not what I typed.
> I said you are inlikely to unclip both feet in an emergency dismount.
> I also did not say it was completely unimportant. I said it was the least important.


I think I was reading what you wrote 

I can easily unclip both feet and land on them during a climb without issue. It's a bit more of a challenge while descending quickly. 

Standover is as important as frame size for Mountain bikes. 

We have plenty of rock trails here so falling over is the last option you would want. A combination of track standing and careful but quick dismounting is what your body learns after a few fall overs. Trust me I have the damage evidence all over my legs


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

If you think that is what I wrote then I think English must be your 2nd language.
And if you can do what you said in an emergency situation on uneven ground then you are truly a gifted athlete.
Believe what you like about standover.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

FTR said:


> Agreed.
> Standover is THE most over-rated fitting but at the same time the one that seems to be considered more than most. I would suggest if you have a cm, you have enough.
> It is only of major importance if you spend a heap of time standing over your bike with both feet flat on the ground.
> You need to spend more time considering the top tube length and probably stack and reach.
> ...


I agree. I was a MTBer first, and I've always ridden 19" MTBs. 17" bikes (correct for inseam) are too short in the top tube.

I've done lots of things to myself riding off-road, but I've only racked myself once, and that would have happened no matter how low the standover was.


----------



## DJT21 (May 22, 2011)

> We have plenty of rock trails here so falling over is the last option you would want. A combination of track standing and careful but quick dismounting is what your body learns after a few fall overs. Trust me I have the damage evidence all over my legs


How long have you been mountain biking for? 

I've been riding cross country, downhill and dirt jumps for about 12 years, yet I can barely recall a time when Ive had to jump off and land with feet either side of the bike. Its something that just doesnt happen, you would have to be going incredibly slowly to manage to unclip both feet and land in this way. 

And even then, Im not quite sure what circumstances would make you have to do such a thing? If you end up going that slowly to lose your balance, then just unclip one foot and lean over to that side.


----------



## turbogrover (Jan 1, 2006)

svard75 said:


> I think I was reading what you wrote
> 
> I can easily unclip both feet and land on them during a climb without issue. It's a bit more of a challenge while descending quickly.
> 
> ...


You're still confused, dude. Just let it go.


----------



## svard75 (Jun 10, 2011)

OMG! Standover IS IMPORTANT in MTBing!!

Geometry, an In Depth Explanation - Pinkbike.com

Fitting Your Bike: Expert Advice from REI

Why do you think MTB frames have such a sloping top tube? For design? Standover is important and not by any means least important.

I tend to think of myself as an aggressive mtber and ride with a group of athletes so no I am not riding slowly but as I said previously climbing is where I can do the double dismount. For example if I hit a double root during a steep climb switchback (at least 39degrees) I can do a double dismount so I can move out of the way quickly enough for the guys behind to get past. How else would you do it?


----------



## DJT21 (May 22, 2011)

> Why do you think MTB frames have such a sloping top tube? For design?


For a number of reasons, but not really for the one you're describing.

- A Low top tube is out of the way, its easier to jump over without getting all tangled up
- Increased strength/stiffness
- Lighter weight
- Looks/fashion


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

MTBs have sloping top tubes so you can slam the saddle down when you're doing "Hey y'all, watch this!"/Darwin Award type stuff.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

svard75 said:


> OMG! Standover IS IMPORTANT in MTBing!!
> 
> Geometry, an In Depth Explanation - Pinkbike.com
> 
> ...


A Trek store and REI do not make a good argument.

A sloping top tube makes a small front triangle, which makes it stiffer. Lighter, too.

Maybe it's because my balls don't hang out of my ass, but the front of the top tube is still at about the same height as it has always been. Higher, in fact due to *suspension forks* (you've just learned the *REAL* reason for sloping top tubes on MTBs, by the way), and that's where I'd want the top tube lower if my junk was the main concern.


----------



## turbogrover (Jan 1, 2006)

svard75 said:


> OMG! Standover IS IMPORTANT in MTBing!!
> 
> Why do you think MTB frames have such a sloping top tube? For design? Standover is important and not by any means least important.


Lets make this easier to understand. All things considered, if the bike doesn't fit you, the amount of standover doesn't make it better. Its the least important determining factor when choosing a frame that fits. My first few mtb's in the 80's didn't have sloping top tubes, and somehow people managed to ride them just fine. The sloping tt just adds standover. Its an evolutionary design benefit. It still shouldn't be a priority when choosing frame size. Bike designers size frames to fit the majority of riders already.


----------



## kokothemonkey (Jul 7, 2004)

icaruswings said:


> I am having a hard time trying to find a road bike with a low-standover because of my short legs in relation to body height (29.5 w/shoes, 6 ft tall). So I was considering converting a high-end 29er with (by road standards) a very low standover and putting road shifters and components on it. Here is what I am thinking:
> 
> Niner Air 9 Carbon 29er frame w/ rigid carbon niner fork
> Chris King/hope hubs laced to road rims w/ disc brakes
> ...


Why not a cheap cyclocross frame? Basically the same thing as a hardtail 29er and you don't have to pay the markup of marketing to all the MTB people.


----------



## NWS Alpine (Mar 16, 2012)

Or he could just do what has been suggested and have a custom road bike perfectly made for the same price.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

kokothemonkey said:


> Why not a cheap cyclocross frame? Basically the same thing as a hardtail 29er and you don't have to pay the markup of marketing to all the MTB people.


One problem with cyclo cross frames is - for a given HTT/ETT length and/or HT height (the two most important fit specs, imho), the standover will often be greater than road bike offerings. The reason is that they usually have a little higher bottom bracket height and little or no top tube slope for shouldering. Again, all of this compared to a comparable frame (in terms of reach and HT) in a seriously sloping tube road bike.



NWS Alpine said:


> Or he could just do what has been suggested and have a custom road bike perfectly made for the same price.


I think the sum being thrown around might indeed get a custom frame. Maybe not from the most high end, well known, custom paint and bling-lugged builder in the world, but for a good frame from a good builder, it would be the thing I'd check into.


----------



## icaruswings (Apr 27, 2010)

Camilo said:


> I think the sum being thrown around might indeed get a custom frame. Maybe not from the most high end, well known, custom paint and bling-lugged builder in the world, but for a good frame from a good builder, it would be the thing I'd check into.


After extensive research and all the comments in this thread I am inclined to agree. However the only problem I see is that most custom frames are either steel or very expensive titanium. To get a carbon frame in my size I would be paying big big $$$$$ for the custom layup etc, so I would rather get a stock frame and benefit from ecomies of scale. 

I have looked into Seven, TET, some local builders etc, but to get a decent frame with nice welds still is going to cost me about as much as most complete bikes in my price range.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

I'm not in the "steel is real" crowd: my two main rides are aluminum and CF. But, the reality is that a good steel frame isn't going to outweigh a decent CF frame by more than a pound or two. Yea, it's tough to get that steel bike into the 15 lb range, but not that tough getting it into the 17 lb range, given similar higher end fork, components, and wheels. Not trying to sell you on that, but it's not that it has to be a tank, and not as huge a deal as most people think. 

That said, I hope you can find a stock frame that will work in whatever material you prefer.


----------



## DM67 (Dec 23, 2008)

Not sure if anyone's linked this yet... http://forums.mtbr.com/niner-bikes/a9cc-air-9-carbon-cross-a9cx-662999.html

I have one (as a mountain bike)... not sure how it would be as a true road bike, though


----------



## turbogrover (Jan 1, 2006)

DM67 said:


> Not sure if anyone's linked this yet... http://forums.mtbr.com/niner-bikes/a9cc-air-9-carbon-cross-a9cx-662999.html
> 
> I have one (as a mountain bike)... not sure how it would be as a true road bike, though


It would be an expensive mistake as a road bike. The geo is all wrong for a road bike.


----------



## xjbaylor (Dec 28, 2006)

icaruswings said:


> After extensive research and all the comments in this thread I am inclined to agree. However the only problem I see is that most custom frames are either steel or very expensive titanium. To get a carbon frame in my size I would be paying big big $$$$$ for the custom layup etc, so I would rather get a stock frame and benefit from ecomies of scale.
> 
> I have looked into Seven, TET, some local builders etc, but to get a decent frame with nice welds still is going to cost me about as much as most complete bikes in my price range.


I understand wanting a carbon bike, but do you really think that a converted carbon MTB is going to be a better alternative than, say, a Gunnar Roadie or Sport made exactly to your specifications. For $1250 you can have them (the people at Waterford) build a bike that fits you perfectly. Not only would you be saving money, you would be buying a purpose built tool for consuming miles _on the road_.


----------



## icaruswings (Apr 27, 2010)

DM67 said:


> Not sure if anyone's linked this yet... http://forums.mtbr.com/niner-bikes/a9cc-air-9-carbon-cross-a9cx-662999.html
> 
> I have one (as a mountain bike)... not sure how it would be as a true road bike, though


Hahaha thats awesome! Cross and road are pretty simular minus the terrain


----------



## Dersnap (Mar 28, 2012)

DM67 said:


> Not sure if anyone's linked this yet... https://forums.mtbr.com/niner-bikes/a9cc-air-9-carbon-cross-a9cx-662999.html
> 
> I have one (as a mountain bike)... not sure how it would be as a true road bike, though


There is also a guy who did this with his Bad Boy.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

Dersnap said:


> There is also a guy who did this with his Bad Boy.


Like the seat post collars


----------



## cs1 (Sep 16, 2003)

svard75 said:


> I think this was unnecessarily harsh. The OP has short legs but a long torso and he said he's looked at all the major brands already. How much does a custom frame build cost? I can find a niner air frame used off ebay for $1200.


Actually, you can get custom geometry from Gunnar for almost the same price. Quality is excellent for a semi custom. Good luck on whatever you choose. BTW, the Niner looks great.


----------

