Posts
2102
Joined
8/1/2009
Location
Durango, CO
US
Edited Date/Time
2/19/2016 3:33pm
A lot of odd things come across our desks here at Vital, and this one is too wild not to share. Designer Patrick Ng, who previously poked fun at the growing number of standards and geometry changes in our industry, has come up with a bike that takes the "bigger wheels are better" philosophy to the extreme. It's called the Interpolate, and it has MASSIVE 39-inch wheels.
What's perhaps more interesting, though, is how Patrick kept the riding position similar to contemporary XC bikes using a patent pending pulley steering system. By mounting the fork so far forward and repositioning the steering controls, he's to eliminated toe-wheel collision which can be a problem on big wheel designs.
You can swap sprockets to speed up or alter steering characteristics. It's shown here with a 1.16:1 steering ratio and integrated steerer chain tensioner. Pretty clever.
Geometry:
While just a concept at this point, it makes one wonder if a bike like this could have its place? How big is too big?
What's perhaps more interesting, though, is how Patrick kept the riding position similar to contemporary XC bikes using a patent pending pulley steering system. By mounting the fork so far forward and repositioning the steering controls, he's to eliminated toe-wheel collision which can be a problem on big wheel designs.
You can swap sprockets to speed up or alter steering characteristics. It's shown here with a 1.16:1 steering ratio and integrated steerer chain tensioner. Pretty clever.
Geometry:
While just a concept at this point, it makes one wonder if a bike like this could have its place? How big is too big?
my friends is 2 meters 11 for sure it would be a solution for these big guys
But I would have made the fork slacker instead so a linkage wouldn't be necessary.
And I don't see any reason to keep the seat tube straight. Bend it, and the chain stays could be way shorter.
Super-long wheelbase and chainstay lengths! Super-stable in a straight line? Turning not so much.
This illustration made me realize that though the attack angle of the wheel to a bump/rock might be lower with the large size, it still has to go over the bump/rock the same amount as the smaller wheel. Meanwhile the suspension in the other bike soaks up the bump/rock maintaining forward momentum. So I am guessing the negatives outweigh the positives at some size.
P
If your trail/path is long and arduous, lacking tight turns, this would probably get you there faster. A sweet weapon for the "Cross Kansas Trail Classic".
This kind of bike makes 26" look awkward.
A: 39 inches.
Actually bump/rock creates far less resistance for a bigger wheel. Like a skateboard, the smallest pebble will stop the board completely putting you on your face. That same size pebble merely gets stuck in your tread with 26 or 29in wheel, 39 in wouldn't even notice if it did. All this means the wheel will be able to carry more forward momentum. And unless your lazy or simply enjoy a sore bum, you would probably be riding knees bent to carry you just above your seat, creating MUCH more suspension than that silly spring gimmick actually creates. You're welcome.
That's a 36incher not 39er. Why they kept the seat angle so slack is strange. If they had a steeper seat angle or bent seat tube then they could have shorter chainstays.
I messed around on bikecad a while back and came up with this:
Reach: 515mm
HA: 67º
SA: 77º
BBH: 330mm
CS:480mm
Also trek has been testing bigger wheels:
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/interview-treks-travis-brown-on-experimen…
2
Post a reply to: How Big is Too Big? 39-inch Wheels on a Mountain Bike