# Anyone Build a 29er For Cyclocross?



## BWG

Anyone Build a 29er For Cyclocross? 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm considering trying cross. I have a nice Litespeed road bike I could convert but it's too nice to be thrashed. Any of you build 29ers for cross with drop bars? Are you running disks? Running mountain wheelsets or road wheels? What kind of gearing - mountain or road cassette and rear derailer? Thanks for any input.


----------



## OnTheRivet

BWG said:


> Anyone Build a 29er For Cyclocross?
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I'm considering trying cross. I have a nice Litespeed road bike I could convert but it's too nice to be thrashed. Any of you build 29ers for cross with drop bars? Are you running disks? Running mountain wheelsets or road wheels? What kind of gearing - mountain or road cassette and rear derailer? Thanks for any input.



Why? If it's gonna be a "cyclocross" bike why try to half-ass it? Cyclocross bikes have waaaayyyyy different geometry than your typical 700c MTB.


----------



## ratspike

The 29ers I see at races look to be in mountain bike trim but with cross tires instead of big fatties. I wouldn't build up a 29er specifically to be a cross bike though. If you already had one or were planning to build one up anyway for mountain biking it'd certainly work but it's a compromise. If you want to really get on it and race race race you'll be better served with a real cross rig IMO.


----------



## BWG

OnTheRivet said:


> Why? If it's gonna be a "cyclocross" bike why try to half-ass it? Cyclocross bikes have waaaayyyyy different geometry than your typical 700c MTB.



There's nothing half-ass about a 29er. I think the lower toptube would be easier for dismounts.


----------



## morganfletcher

Cyclocross bikes are 29ers.

Discuss.

Morgan


----------



## BWG

ratspike said:


> The 29ers I see at races look to be in mountain bike trim but with cross tires instead of big fatties. I wouldn't build up a 29er specifically to be a cross bike though. If you already had one or were planning to build one up anyway for mountain biking it'd be fine to test the waters, but otherwise you'll be a lot better served by the real deal.


Thanks for the input. I appreciate it.


----------



## BWG

morganfletcher said:


> Cyclocross bikes are 29ers.
> 
> Discuss.
> 
> Morgan


Sorry - I guess I should have specified 29 inch mountainbike frames - I've never heard anyone call road bikes or cross bikes 29ers.


----------



## ratspike

BWG said:


> There's nothing half-ass about a 29er. I think the lower toptube would be easier for dismounts.


Nah, that doesn't really figure into it. The top tube on my geared crosser is nice and snug up on the boys when I stand over it. When you dismount you're bringing your leg around behind you rather than in front and over the top tube. If anything, that low sloping top tube is a negative rather than a positive, as the tight triangle makes shouldering the bike anywhere from difficult to impossible, depending on the frame size. Even the slightly sloping top tubes on my JtS and San Jose aren't as nice to shoulder as my buddy's Cross Check.


----------



## BWG

ratspike said:


> Nah, that doesn't really figure into it. The top tube on my geared crosser is nice and snug up on the boys when I stand over it. When you dismount you're bringing your leg around behind you rather than in front and over the top tube. If anything, that low sloping top tube is a negative rather than a positive, as the tight triangle makes shouldering the bike anywhere from difficult to impossible, depending on the frame size. Even the slightly sloping top tubes on my JtS and San Jose aren't as nice to shoulder as my buddy's Cross Check.


Good point. Thanks!


----------



## morganfletcher

BWG said:


> Sorry - I guess I should have specified 29 inch mountainbike frames - I've never heard anyone call road bikes or cross bikes 29ers.


Cyclocross and 29ers are both bicycles designed to go off-road with 700c rims and knobby tires, separated only by linguistics and cultural preferences.

I'm sort of kidding.

But to answer your question, sort of, mountain bikes - whether 20", 24", 26", 28" or 29" wheels - do OK at cyclocross races, but cyclocross bikes are usually faster.

Cyclocross bikes do OK at mountain bike races, but mountain bikes are usually faster.

There was a time before mountain bikes. There was a time before 29ers. There as a time before cyclocross bikes. They're all just bicycles, or names for bicycles. Cyclocross bikes are 29ers. 

Morgan
P.S. Red bikes are faster.


----------



## morganfletcher

BWG said:


> There's nothing half-ass about a 29er. I think the lower toptube would be easier for dismounts.


The top tube has very little to do with the lower body, during dismounts. As for the upper body, a lower top tube makes dismounts more complicated because the rider must reach further down to grab the top tube for the carry, and there's less room inside the front triangle for the riders arm and shoulder during carries.

Morgan


----------



## BWG

morganfletcher said:


> There was a time before mountain bikes. There was a time before 29ers. There as a time before cyclocross bikes. They're all just bicycles, or names for bicycles. Cyclocross bikes are 29ers.
> 
> Morgan
> P.S. Red bikes are faster.



Right on.:thumbsup:


----------



## HarrieH

Just the ridiculous rule that for CX the tire diam. has to be < 35mm.


----------



## hawss

Grrrr.


----------



## dyg2001

The Lalonde Bros of Wisco are racing Bob Brown cyclocross 29ers:

http://tinyurl.com/yqv537

http://tinyurl.com/29a44c

The frames have clearance for 2.2" 29er MTB tires.

Here they are finishing 1st and 2nd in the Pro/1/2 Holloween cross race this past Sunday in Milwaukee:

http://tinyurl.com/2db88v


----------



## PeanutButterBreath

]If you have a 29er and want to race cross it can work. If you are looking to buy a bike for cross, a 29er with drops would not be my first choice as it would be over-built with un-optimized geometry.

Discs are not and advantage in a CX race IMO and add that much more weight. Better to get a frame with canti bosses and use canti brakes.

Wheels are another area where typical mountain bike stuff will weight you down.

Its CX -- you can do anything. But building up a 29er for it will net a bike that is heavier than it needs to be for CX even after you compromise its MTB worthiness trying to lighten it up.


----------



## buck-50

There's always this...

http://www.dirtragmag.com/print/article.php?ID=895&category=stuff_reviews


----------



## bward1028

i'm using mine as a pit bike, but haven't had to try it out yet


----------



## Vegancx

morganfletcher said:


> Cyclocross bikes are 29ers.
> 
> Discuss.
> 
> Morgan


Actually, with a cross tire, a cross bike is a 28er... the rim diameter is the same, however.


----------



## hooj

Why would someone want to buy a new 29er for cyclocross use (I assume we're talking about racing here)? It's heavy and the geometry is shitty so why wouldn't you just buy a cross bike? If you happen to have a 29er and you want to try cross and the commissaires aren't enforcing the rules that strictly you can always try cross on your 29er but cross bike is still better for cross races.


----------



## addict42

Vegancx said:


> Actually, with a cross tire, a cross bike is a 28er... the rim diameter is the same, however.



Funny thing is, only bikes with 58x622 (2.3x700c) tires are true 29'ers, 'cause anything smaller won't even come close to the appropriate wheel/tire diameter. What's better is that 27" wheels are BIGGER than 29" wheels!:shocked:


----------



## ferday

> But to answer your question, sort of, mountain bikes - whether 20", 24", 26", 28" or 29" wheels - do OK at cyclocross races, but cyclocross bikes are usually faster.


fascinating thread!

this one comes up regularly on mtbr and most people say the MTB's are faster?

i would personally not want my 29er on a CX course, for the reasons mentioned (geometry, weight etc)


----------



## hooj

ferday said:


> this one comes up regularly on mtbr and most people say the MTB's are faster?


Could be if the course is technical more MTB and less cyclocross. Faster course or with some steeper and/or longer run-ups and MTB's are nowhere near the front.


----------



## addict42

MTB's are faster [when piloted by former world cup riders]:biggrin5:

Georgia's A series was won by just such a rider last season. I loved watching those races (and wishing I was even that fast on my cx bike)


----------



## Chpfly

Mountain Bike Action Magazine has a 3 page article on turning your MTB into a cyclocrosser! The guy in the article is riding a 69er!  

December 2007 issue.


----------



## teoteoteo

buck-50 said:


> There's always this...
> 
> http://www.dirtragmag.com/print/article.php?ID=895&category=stuff_reviews


They had a bike swap meet at the Willits shop last weekend in Austin, there was a rig similar to that one that I wanted badly to ride. I just ended up too busy selling stuff to roll on one.


----------



## evilbeaver

If a person is trying to get the most out of one bike, a 29er could be fun. Run a rigid fork on it in the fall with 'cross wheels and tires and don't expect to have any fun shouldering it. Then, swap out for the mtb tires for winter onward. If you can afford more than one bike, ride a real 'cross bike. They're faster on real 'cross courses and can actually be shouldered. You won't look ridiculous pushing your mud-covered bike up the run-ups.


----------



## Greg Hejtmanek

I think where they got that 35mm rule and cross bike status is that is what the UCI regulates the max wheel size. Most US races pretty much apply the "run what ya brung" rule, except the A's at the UCI races. I think the biggest problem with a 29er is in the build philosophy. I want a 29er with a very small triangle so I can get on and off on the single track ok if I need to. I want a cross bike with a big hole for a triangle to get my arms and shoulder in on carries.
I have a Matt chester singlespeed that will fit the 29er tires, but the bike is huge with the big boy tires and the top tube sits a mile off the ground compared with 32-34mm cross tires where it is a perfect fit for my cross needs.. But at the end of the day 95% of a cross race is done not carrying your bike on your shoulder, so you are at a 5% disadvantage. But if you want to dab in cross and 29er mtb the rest of the time, I am sure it would work. But you will lose a few seconds or have to work a bit harder on the carries to be equal to a conventional crossbike if you can't get your shoulder in the hole pretty quick..


----------



## jayhawkbiker

*road frame for cross*

What about using a road bike frame over a cross frame.. i run an old steel road bike converted to single speed with cross tires to race and my friends tell me a _real_ cross bike would be faster.. other than having gears (which mine could) and being a pound on two lighter why would this make any difference?


----------



## Greg Hejtmanek

If it is not too muddy an old 70s roadbike probably has the tire clearance. The fork height clearance, Between the top of the front tire and the bottom of the crown might be an issue. And of course the brakes might get mudded up quicker, but that would and has worked for a lot of folks for a start up cross bike..


----------



## Josh Patterson

*Old road/touring rigs for CX*



jayhawkbiker said:


> What about using a road bike frame over a cross frame.. i run an old steel road bike converted to single speed with cross tires to race and my friends tell me a _real_ cross bike would be faster.. other than having gears (which mine could) and being a pound on two lighter why would this make any difference?


I think there's a lot to be appreciated in a purpose-built cross bike: weight, geometry, and modern/lighter components. 

_But_ past few weekends I've seen many old steel road and touring bikes at the races. For Midwestern races - which so far have been completely dry - I don't think they put you at huge disadvantage if you're out there to have a good time. 

Generally, older road bikes have longer stays, long-reach sidepull brakes, a higher BB and more relaxed geometry which all work well for cross. I've brazed canti-studs on several friends old road frames so they'll work better for cross. 

Saturday night's party made Sunday's race quite painful. A friend riding a old SS road bike set up with bullhorns (...UCI legal? ) sped past me easily. 



Cody getting ready to pass me. Way to go Cody!


----------



## soup67

[email protected] said:


> _But_ past few weekends I've seen many old steel road and touring bikes at the races.


My starter cross bike-- freebie 80s Univega Metroprix (tourer) frame/fork with parts bin build. $70 out the door. It's a blast to ride and race. 










soup


----------



## Josh Patterson

Looks great!


----------



## C Cow

*RIde what you got!*



BWG said:


> Anyone Build a 29er For Cyclocross?
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I'm considering trying cross. I have a nice Litespeed road bike I could convert but it's too nice to be thrashed. Any of you build 29ers for cross with drop bars? Are you running disks? Running mountain wheelsets or road wheels? What kind of gearing - mountain or road cassette and rear derailer? Thanks for any input.



Don't listen to all the negative comments on your idea. Race your 29er, and decide for yourself what you might do to make it work a little easier. Narrow tires are great in some places, fat tires are great in others. Gears are great in some places, singlespeeds are great in others. I've seen all types of dismounts, even the "bringing the right foot over the top tube" method, which works quite well for one of our local pros. I've seen tall riders shoulder their 29ers with no problems. 

I think that many racers are force fed traditional requirements and are scared to ride outside the lines, or look different. It's all about fun for 99.99% of us, and the people making money and supporting themselves from racing aren't here crapping on peoples dreams.

Ride what you got, have fun, get dirty, go home happy!


----------



## PeanutButterBreath

C Cow said:


> I think that many racers are force fed traditional requirements and are scared to ride outside the lines, or look different. It's all about fun for 99.99% of us, and the people making money and supporting themselves from racing aren't here crapping on peoples dreams.


I rode my last race on a powder blue '78 Univega with riser bars and Dia-Compe centerpulls -- I am not scared to look different.

I don't think it is crapping on anyone's dreams to point out that certain options are going to to require compromises. I think that is providing useful guidance based on many combined years of experience coming from all walks of life and ability levels.


----------



## aabbas

Gary Fisher hizself did the Pilarcitos CX race last weekend on a Superfly 29er with a Fox fork and full-on Schwalbe Little Albert MTB tires.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath

Whoa, this 953 frame is freakin' nice: 


dyg2001 said:


> http://tinyurl.com/29a44c


----------



## OnTheRivet

C Cow said:


> Don't listen to all the negative comments on your idea. Race your 29er, and decide for yourself what you might do to make it work a little easier. Narrow tires are great in some places, fat tires are great in others. Gears are great in some places, singlespeeds are great in others. I've seen all types of dismounts, even the "bringing the right foot over the top tube" method, which works quite well for one of our local pros. I've seen tall riders shoulder their 29ers with no problems.
> 
> I think that many racers are force fed traditional requirements and are scared to ride outside the lines, or look different. It's all about fun for 99.99% of us, and the people making money and supporting themselves from racing aren't here crapping on peoples dreams.
> 
> Ride what you got, have fun, get dirty, go home happy!


Re-read the OP's original post Sparky. If he'd said he was going to use his existing 29'er I'd have said "go for it" but he was asking about building up a 29'er to race cross, hence every bodies reply about using a proper cross bike if starting from scratch.


----------



## C Cow

OnTheRivet said:


> Re-read the OP's original post Sparky. If he'd said he was going to use his existing 29'er I'd have said "go for it" but he was asking about building up a 29'er to race cross, hence every bodies reply about using a proper cross bike if starting from scratch.


Hey Sport, Sparky never learned how to re-read. Sparky only knows that he sees a bunch of unsupporting cyclists, and a couple of neutral cyclists on the subject of cross dressing a 29er. This site reads like the magazines sometimes, on how the only good equipment is the newest and the genre specific. Whatever happened to new racers in our different areas of cycling who were cheered on when they came out to race on a bike that may have been a little insufficient? Maybe you and Biff were able to go out and buy the latest greatest crossboy dream bike, but not all of us have your country club funding. 
Maybe the OPer already has a 29er to race cross on, or maybe he was thinking of getting a new or first bike and wanted to get the most from it, doing mtb and cx. I don't make money at cycling, but I do hear a lot of riders (who can write a good game) spewing equipment opinions that are sometimes harsh to the newbies, and the wannaby newbies. As you are re-reading the entries here, remember that people without bikes are looking around at these so-called informative websites for guidance, too. And without the new racers, we'll all be coming in last forever.

Or maybe I should just go back and try to re-re-read that book on re-reading comprehension that I studied both years I was in the eighth grade.


----------



## PeanutButterBreath

Way to snatch controversy from the jaws of consensus. :thumbsup:

What is your deal, anyway? 29ers are inferior to CX bikes for CX racing, period. They offer no performance advantages. There are many reasons, but here are some obvious ones: they are heavier; the top tubes are inconveniently placed; the cable routing is not optimized for CX, the BB drop is set for 2.1" or greater tires. Sure, all of these things could be overcome (or just ignored), but why? A 29er will not make you faster on a CX course, but it may well make you slower.

The fact that there are successful racers who ride 29ers proves nothing. Show me a racer who is wicked fast riding a 29er with cut-off jeans and a flannel shirt and I will show you a racer who would still be wicked fast on a Colnago C50 Cross wearing head to toe white Assos.


----------



## CabDoctor

29er frames are CHEAP! you can find them on ebay for $90 verses $200+ for cross


----------



## BWG

Thanks for all the replies - and the "passion". I found a new old stock 2005 Bianchi Cross Concept for less than 1/2 the cost of a new one and I love it so far. My 29ers are full suspension trail bikes. I like to be a little different, but considering the weight and geometry compromises and the cost of building a 29er from scratch for cross - I decided to go with the real deal.


----------

