Speaking of MTB's...

[Mikej]

Has anybody ever had a custom mtb made with G2 (or whatever the current "G" geometry is) built? Just wondering.

[markie]

yeah, kind of, I think...

I had mine built with the same amount of trail, but then I ride rigid.

Why do you ask?:)

[dan_hudson]

Amateur-hour warning - Apologies if I screw this up!

G2 = Genesis 2. Is Trek/Gary Fisher's approach to making a big-wheel bike handle a particular way. Nowadays folks tend to refer to the resulting fork offset - 51 (or 52?) mm.

If you poke around you'll see a number of builders, big + small, spec forks on big-wheel bikes with this offset (vs 46mm).

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/To-the-Point-Wheel-Diameter-VS-Fork-Offset.html

[Mikej]

yeah, kind of, I think...

I had mine built with the same amount of trail, but then I ride rigid.

Why do you ask?:)

Thinking of a new frame but want the front end lower and figured out that my current hta vs 69.5 will lower the front by around a centimeter. Just wondering if anybody had a problem with the 50 mm rake and 69 ish hta

[fatallightning]

using hta to lower front end seems a bit backwards. I'd figure out HTA based on how you want the bike to handle first, then play with stack via ht length, suspension fork a2c or running a negative rise stem or dropper bar.

[markie]

I think that is a good question to take to a couple of different builders.

This is amateur hour for me, too... But I think for a steel 29er it is tricky making a front end stiff and strong with a super short head-tube. Then there is the additional problem that a suspension fork might also hit the down-tube. I ended up getting my bike not suspension corrected to get a longer head-tube...