What is the consensus on mullet for tall riders (DH)

Mullets are popular for a few reasons, clearance being a big one, but due to the difference in axle heights front to rear you get very good turn in and its often easier to corner because of it. In most tests the pros found mullets to be faster because of this which is why even tall pros opt for mullet bikes these days. 

Other benefits are stronger rear wheel means less failures, lighter unsprung mass on the rear can improve suspension performance. Obviously roll-over is worse, but pump performance is improved. 

Mullet for uplift served stuff, full 29" for when you'll be climbing.

Here's a little copy/paste from a mullet-related thread on another site:

If you're interested in people who know A TON about designing and riding bikes talking about mixed wheels vs full 29" then you should listen to Santa Cruz's podcast called The Roller Door. They have a few episodes with Kiran MacKinnon in which they talk about the differences, ideas, experiments, etcc.

Here's a link to one of the podcast episodes: https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/out-to-lunch-kiran-mackinnon-on-mixed-wheels-mx-specific/id1670189778?i=1000621036323

They have a few other episodes that specifically mention some thoughts and have a discussion around mixed wheels but I think this one is a good one to listen to.

...and in this podcast the designers of the new Norco DH bike talk about why they decided to make their new downhill bike a mixed wheel size with some convertibility to full 29".

https://blisterreview.com/podcasts/norcos-new-dh-race-bike-ep-219

If I remember correctly, they start talking about it around 28 minutes in (in the "design of the bike" section of the podcast). They mention how they did some race testing and was surprised when the mullet setup on their bike was actually faster when they expected the full 29" to be faster.

Haven't ridden both on a DH bike, but on enduro and trail bikes, I wouldn't say one is inherently more safe or fast compared to the other. I think mullet bikes with appropriately long chainstays are just as stable as their 29er counterparts, but definitely turn in easier as Steve mentioned.

When you listen to the podcasts you'll hear some of the thoughts and real-world observable differences behind it. As the owner of a mullet and a 29er, I can attest to some of the differences. The bikes are super different so there are a million differences between my two bikes but there are definitely some things I can pinpoint as "different because of the mixed wheel vs 29er" setups.

If you want more info about mixed wheel sizes for regular riders, the Santa Cruz podcasts are pretty good. They talk about what changes and how it affects the ridefeel in different ways in some of their podcasts. It's cool that they talk to a person involved with making those product geometry decisions on a number of different podcast episodes to chat through a million things about the bikes including the mixed wheel/29er differences.

I've got mullets and 29ers, and the axle heights is the real difference maker. It gives a feel or riding behind the front wheel instead of on-top of it. It lowers the endo angle (the angle at which the bike tips over forward) giving more confidence to push into the front and brake really hard. 

My 29er definitely rolls nicer through chunk and pedals nicer, but I've never really needed extra speed through a rock garden, it's about speed in and out of corners for me. 

Mullets whips nicer, which is a big benefit. Im 177cm with short legs so on mid travels and above I don't like 29er rear on steep tracks. 

But really it's about the feeling of being tucked in behind this big front wheel, where you can lean the frame into corners and the front just grips up and the rear swings around. It's less of a on rails feeling that 29ers have when they corner, where the bike leans in evenly front to rear. 

27.5" rider here (yup that still exists 😆). I've been able to experiment 2 variants of the same bike (Commencal DH v4 mullet vs 29") back to back in Vallnord a few years back. I can say that the cornering speed/feel is really the most noticeable trait I've experienced ! I'm far from having a high level in DH but I really liked the feeling with the mullet, it's like inviting you to really lean and charge through every corner. I've not felt a big difference in the chunk to be honest, but it might have to do with the suspensions (Ohlins for the mullet vs FOX performance for the full 29).

One thing I recall now and that has been mentioned in the comments above, is that the position is a bit more rearward (or at least it feels like it), hence the behaviour in the turns but also in the really steep and rough sections. By the way I'm 182cm if that can be of any help

26 for life.

This is a great description of the differences. I agree.

Something worth mentioning that's similar to your endo-angle comment: How the pivot point for the rear axle effects manuals/bunnyhops.

We'll sit and talk about perfect geometry and how much 5mm of chainstay length makes a difference for manuals/maneuverability as that axle gets moved around...but then completely leave out of the conversation how much of a difference 19mm of axle height makes for the same things - the axle being the point we pivot around when manualing/bunnyhopping.

When I added my 29er short travel trail bike to the stable I was kind of disappointed by how much harder it was to bunnyhop and pull into a manual than my mullet hardtail was. Not impossible, of course, but it was unexpectedly more difficult. Sure, the front end is a little longer on the 29er but it's not THAT much longer and I brought the stack height up to be similar. It still felt really difficult even though the chainstay length was only 2mm different. There's definitely a timing difference for hops but I got the timing worked out pretty easily.

I kept kind of working on it and noticed that if I pulled for the manual at a slightly different angle - a little less straight back and a little more up-and-back - the manual pulled up more easily. After adapting the technique so was the pull for bunnyhop.

That makes sense, too. If the bottom bracket's in the same place on both bikes (at sag, they're really close) and the rear axle of one bike is 19mm higher than the other, then the angle you need to pull (assuming the pull is the same force) to get the same amount of rotation at that rear axle would also need to change. If you pull "at some angle" on a mullet then you'll need "at some angle plus a bit more to compensate for the higher pivot point" on a 29er.

There are other positive tradeoffs I'm noticing so far even though I haven't even gotten my 29er onto a trail yet (got it on sale late November and it was winter then as it is still now) but that different manual/hop pull technique/difficulty is definitely a potential downside of the 29er. Relatedly, the 29er seems more stable on the back wheel when I get into a manual; probably because of the longer lever and the additional rollover height/momentum.

Mullets for DH feel much more agile, and the speed feels the same. At least for me, but I'm not a racer.

DH 29ers require you to be more centered on the bike. I'm 1.88 with long legs and in my first jump trail testing previous gen Commencal Supreme I felt the tyre buzz... Not worth it for marginal gains on stability.

If you are not fighting for tenths of a second on a racetrack, I would say mullets all the way, regardless of height.

One thing to check is geo charts (specially BB height) since some bikes get lower BBs in mullet config, even when the flip chip is in the right setting. This can be good or bad, depending on the terrain you ride.

I’m 6’3” and have been on mullet for 2 bikes now. Everything said above rings true for me. It feels great in turns which for me seems to keep the bike lively even though it is long in an XL. Feels like I can really squat and dig in the rear end for traction on steeps, probably due to what SteveClimber described about the “endo angle.” 

I have only my one anecdote to tell here so take it for what it is. 

Recently I got to ride a mullet patrol and a full 29 spire back to back on the same trail.  Before riding I had my mind set that the spire was going to be the bike I favord.  I was sure that the longer chainstays and full 29" wheel in the back of the spire meant more grip in turns allowing my to arc my corners more then square off and slash.  At 6'1" I don't have standover/tire buzz issues so the mullet felt like a gimmick I did not need. 

Like others have said, I was surprised by the mullet in several areas.  First turn initiation was much easier.  I had assumed that while I lean my bike to turn, the front wheel still player a large part in initiating the turn.  The mullet would tip in much easier and change direction faster.  Secondly the smaller rear wheel still tracked super well and would hold an arc nicely through a corner.  No stepping out or having to cuttie to corner.  I have a full 27.5 dh bike and the only way you can get the thing to turn is to find the apex of a berm and dump the bars into the ground. 

I havn't had a chance to take the patrol out on any super rough descents where I might notice the rear wheel getting hung up.  I will say, if you are getting a bike with a rearward axel path that even might be less of an issue. 

So far the only downside I have found is now I will have to bring TWO extra tires when I go on road trips.   

Studbeefpile describes the difference the best. Mullet opens up more options in corners, by this I mean you can slash, do a nice arc, or change it halfway thru the corner. Full 29r like my XL Spire does not like to slash, so if the radius is too tight for the arc I chose, the only option is to hit the brakes in order to exit the corner still headed the the right direction on the trail. While on of my Mullets (XL Supreme V5 and Decoy SN) I can just lean the bike over a bit more, combined with some extra pedal and handlebar pressure, the rear end will kick out a bit, and the front wheel is positioned perfectly for the exit of the corner, no braking required. 

As a 6’2” rider on a Spire I have to say this discussion is stressing me out. Telling myself I don’t have issues leaning the bike and getting it to turn in, but I haven’t ridden a mullet ever. 

Everything you know is a lie.

I'm 6' 3" and weigh around 230 Pounds in your weird scale. Have a Nukeproof reactor 29/29 rail bike and a Giant reign E+1 Mullet. Both bikes are fun, and have their place but i do find when riding e bikes for a bit i have a tendency to tyre Buzz getting back on Reactor. Maybe that says something? Can definitely rail the Mullet bike way harder into corners but what e bike cant you do that on?

Been full Enduro for a while since the last DH rig which was a 27.5 Aurum. Better comparo would be when I picked up the V5 in Late july of 23 I had been riding my Spire at Whistler in the low Position with dh tires and 180 fork, it ripped! Main thing I noticed initially with the V5 was less traction in the rear especially for braking and a little less so for greasy rock slabs, but this was easily compensated for with more front brake. Oh and the rim got trashed in a hurry even with 5 more psi than i run in a 29 dh tire setup. Not sure if it's that V5 suspension is magical or its that the 27.5 hanging up is just a myth, but the v5 almost seems to accelerate when you let it do its thing in the rough stuff. That being said my EEB is a mullet as well with a very similar suspension to the spire and it doesn't seem to hang up any more either, but only have ridden that locally in bham stuff which is smooth and steep. 

For DH, I've spent some time on all the formats over the years. My current DH rig and trail bike are both full 29ers. But the one thing I personally feel is that a mixed wheeled (Mullet) DH bike accelerates faster. Both the mullet bikes I've tried was a V10 and a Commencal supreme V4. And they're both are as stable as my full 29er DH bike. But I feel I have to work harder to get my 29er up to speed. I'm willing to bet their better on the really steep mountain courses. But I live and ride in New England. I don't think any of our mountains bike parks are really that steep out here. (Highland, Killington, Thunder Mountain, etc...) And for your pick between the Intense M1 vs the Commencal Supreme V5? Their both great picks. I would pick the one that puts the bigger smile on your face. 

Another way to put it is that 29ers feel slower. You are probably going the same speed if not faster, but it does feel slower, calmer.

This is great if you are really pushing to warp speeds, or on super gnarly tracks. But if you are just riding for fun they can be a bit dull.

But I don’t want a new frame, rear wheel, and rear tires 🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️

It's all personal preference. I prefer how the 29er has a more "even" feel due to the BB drop being the same at both axles. Whatever the front wheel does, the rear wheel does the same instead of "doing it's own thing." I'm sure I'm actually faster on a mullet but I personally don't value the whole "you can forget about the rear wheel" aspect that mixed wheel setups bring to the table. 

My mental health appreciates you

6'2" Here and 175lbs.  (I feel weight matters in this equation too because of leverage)

I honestly adjust to either mx or full 29 setups equally well after a month's worth of riding on them.  For a brief period I had a megatower 2 and a nomad 6 so I was able to do back to back comparisons with bikes that were more or less the same intent/design save wheel size.  (no i'm not rich or dumb, I bought a nomad 6 while I was waiting for mt1 warranty replacement which SC replaced with an MT2) I was a bit faster on the full 29 in full blown shit show chunk that was mostly straight and I was faster in tighter and steeper trails, especially when I found myself trying to hit sketchy catch berms over and over on the nomad 6.

There are a few things I learned riding both back to back:

-ideally, I like slightly different geometry between the two.  I'd optimally like about 5mm less reach on a full 29r and I like a few mm longer chainstay on an mx bike (all else being equal).  I do find that when I first switch over, the full 29r has a feeling like the weight is on the front and it's less intuitive to get the front lifted up over things.  I realize that this isn't a revelation as it's explainable by the difference in bb drop... but this is why I end up liking a full 29r 5-10mm shorter in reach.  I think that my answer may potentially change on reach dimensions if the 29r had more stack, but that then would require a bit longer chainstay maybe, it's a mental rabbit hole.  

-The 29r setup pushes me towards traditional and acknowledged best practice braking and cornering form.  The 29r will stand you up faster if you're dragging brakes into and through corners so there is an instant feedback loop.  That feedback loop, pushes me towards purposeful braking prior to lean over turn in, then getting off of the brakes through the corner.  While this feels slower, on the clock it's faster.  I have a tendency to stack too much speed into corners on the mx bike because it feels like I can do that and not pay the price.  My corner exit speed would however disagree with that and tells the story.  

-Thigh buzz is where you notice the rear wagon wheel.  I don't get butt buzz any more or less it seems to me.  When I'm running out of talent, or running out of bike, I'm going to buzz my ass the same.  What I do notice is when I have no choice but to be off the back and I'm trying to tip the bike in and buzzing thighs.  

-Rear wheels are definitely stronger.  I kill ex511's on my 29rs every 4-6 park days and it takes me 6-8 on an mx bike.  Even then, I find less flat spots and less loose spokes in the process when the rims are at end of life.  

Honestly for me it's horses for courses.  I feel like the one advantage to being an outlier in average height, is that you can get benefits out of a full 29r with minimal draw backs.  It does beg the question though... if mx bikes are "better" or at least, more widely accepted for people 5'6" to 6'0"... then should us 6'2" + mooley bastards be on a 30" or 32" front wheel and a 29" rear wheel?  

Thanks for sharing, a bit of a side question - assuming you are dumb (or rather, that I am dumb), would you have a nomad6 and megatower2 in the stable at the same time if you had to do it all over again?

I had similar observations between a nomad 6 and madonna v2.2 fwiw - I found the high stack height and longer chainstay maintained great turning characteristics but definitely not as nimble as the nomad. In short, punchy, tight climbs, strava tells me that I climb faster on the nomad than the madonna, but on longer rides the madonna covers more ground.

I am definitely not a 1 bike stable type of guy.  It's not that I couldn't be... but mtb is my religion so to speak and escape from an overly stressful work situation... so take my (very dumb) advice with a grain of salt.  

I went back and forth on this very question.  The n6 sometimes felt slow on climbs compared to the mt2... but if I checked strava (highly inaccurate) and weighed those times with how it felt, the n6 was just as fast and in some terrain, faster.  I could honestly see where an mx bike may be faster on certain climbs in your area because you'd maybe have a bit more confidence at the prospect of front wheel catchers and also an easier time getting the front wheel over ledges.  

I digress... my experience is the same as yours.  They end up sorta even up in general trail riding, but there is no doubt that the 29r carries more speed over a really long ride then the mx bike does.  For a brief moment, I considered keeping the mt2 and building it up with a light weight trail bike build... but ultimately opted to sell it and keep my trail bike a 140r/150f full 29r and pair that with the n6 for doing stupid things.  

I could make an argument for owning long travel versions of an mx bike or a full 29r.  That being said, when I owned the two, I was constantly debating which bike to take where and on which rides.  I was making equal cases for both, which to me was an indicator that there was too much overlap and I should just force myself into one or the other.  

So... since I went round and round on an answer... here's the summary:

-If I were enduro racing, I'd keep the mt2 (or long travel full 29r) and get a short travel mx bike (5010 or something).

-If I were buying a pure bread downhill race bike, then I'd be tempted to go full 29r.  Mostly because I'm old, don't race enough and the riding style that a full blown 29r forces you in would be good for me.  Also, because I would be doing dh races at mammoth and snow summit where straight line stability and rock garden capability rule all.  

-If I were just looking for a fun park bike or dh bike that I raced occasionally, but mostly rode for fun... then I'd pick an mx bike as it's as fast if I'm not riding like a moron, and more fun when I am riding like a moron.  

For me, the best balance ended up being a long travel mx bike and a short travel 29r trail bike.  The truth is... long travel 29r "enduro" race bikes are so capable for pedaling, so confident with climbing traction in loose conditions, some comfortable at the end of a long day and pedal so well... that there is less and less of a reason to go short travel.  For me, the biggest reason to go with one longer travel bike and one shorter travel bike is the ease of accessing the shock progression on the short travel bike with less work.  I can seemingly pre-load a shorter travel bike with my ankles only and not my knees, which makes certain trails way more fun.  But a long travel 29r with a firmer compression tune, is damn near as playful these days.

Sigh: This post is too long, I'm avoiding work and pontificating.  If you can't tell, I have really enjoyed spending time exploring the nuances of MX vs 29.  I do enjoy the thought exercise of the optimum two bike stable.  My answer seems to change every few months if I'm honest.