I know squat about off road, but Jeff Jones on long wheelbase

[eddief]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMkQ7z9Gi7c&feature=youtu.be

This looks like fun and love those tubes...and tires.

[msl819]

Good watch. I envy his riding terrain.

[unterhausen]

interesting video. I was just thinking about this for gravel road riding. The reason MTB riders like short chainstays is tight singletrack. Not sure a long wheelbase is going to work that well in that application.

I have always disliked bikes that came with a rigid fork and "suspension corrected" geometry. One or the other. The only time I have ever changed a fork was when the oem rigid fork on my fatbike was recalled and the Bluto suspension fork came out at the same time. Otherwise I think it's pretty rare.

[Davist]

thanks, interesting. I love his bikes, but not in the budget (currently), I'm sure he's onto something for real riding. Agreed on his terrain, looks fun.

[Mikej]

On a 29er long stays (44-44.5 cm) are going to give you more high speed stability and better climbing. I see by long stays he is talking very long. His bikes are more of a fun bike, but I'm not sure they would handle very well.

[stephenmarklay]

Wow very cool. My Salsa El Mar has an adjustable rear stay and I may try it all the way out.

I am Jonesing to try one of these bikes!

I my try one of his bars. I have not been loving he reach etc on my Salsa setup.

[p nut]

On a 29er long stays (44-44.5 cm) are going to give you more high speed stability and better climbing. I see by long stays he is talking very long. His bikes are more of a fun bike, but I'm not sure they would handle very well.

I don't have the longer Jones Plus bikes, but trust me when I say his bikes handle VERY well. If his understanding of a great handling bike carried over to the new Plus models, I wouldn't hesitate to get one. The dude knows rigid Mtn bikes.

[false_Aest]

I got to have dinner a few weeks ago with Jeff -- everything we spoke about translated perfectly when I got a leg over his frames.

The really cool thing was that while the frames are big for me they don't feel unwieldy ... they're nearly Goldilocks.

They're certainly on my short list.

[Pastashop]

http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/f-appa-complete.htm

Just sayin...

[Villgaxx]

http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/f-appa-complete.htm

Just sayin...

that's the first thing i thought. GP yelling 'simpson's did it!'. and cheaper.

[Villgaxx]

not my bag. the short tt, long wheelbase, slack-angled mountain bikes were awful on trails. if you like it, have at it, but the short chainstay, steeper angles, long top tube bikes are so much nicer and handle so much better.

tastes vary, i guess.

[stephenmarklay]

not my bag. the short tt, long wheelbase, slack-angled mountain bikes were awful on trails. if you like it, have at it, but the short chainstay, steeper angles, long top tube bikes are so much nicer and handle so much better.

tastes vary, i guess.

It intrigues me. I defiantly like shallow seat tube angles and head tube angles new bikes are getting shallower not steeper. I am seeing 67-69 as pretty common. Short stays are certainly in vogue right now.

[p nut]

Matt Chester via 63xc:

"Chainstay length is subjected to incessant analysis. 'Shorter chainstays are better for climbing!' crows the internet discussion forum sage. Utter nonsense! No single aspect of frame design will enable you to predict a bike's handling characteristics. (If that were really the case, my job would be much easier.) In the real world, all aspects of frame design work in concert with one another. Adjust one, and the others are affected."

http://www.63xc.com/mattc/setup.htm

Paper stats and real world ride experience can differ drastically. Hopefully you guys can get a chance to ride a Jones before forming an opinion.

[Ronsonic]

TBH, I'm a layman here, sorta know about mtb dynamics and geometry but just the limited experience of someone who doesn't get to build up lots and lots of different designs.

That said, I like the way he thinks. The rigid specific design makes a lot more sense than the stubby headtube, Loooong fork leg thing we usually see. I'd think someone paying that much for a frameset would know whether he wanted suspension or not.

The over/under truss mount also looks right for rigidity and weight. Don't know how the extra long rear center would work on the tight trails around here. I do know that old school mid-length stays don't hurt.

Anyway, interesting approach. THanks for posting the vid.

[benb]

I would definitely be intrigued to try this. I've had way more issues with short wheelbase bikes not keeping both wheels on the ground than I've ever had with any kind of bike not "turning fast enough."

You can't make the turn on technical terrain if you can't keep both wheels on the ground through the turn, although in my case I think the answer is probably longer chainstays + shorter top tube and front center. I think he's talking about 2 out of 3 of those here but not necessarily all 3.

It also explains why I didn't like the Jones Loop H-bar I tried on my bike.. the bike I tried it on is too long to begin with so I wasn't going to be able to shift around like he advocates. When I did try to shift forward on it I ended up too far forward and off balance. That bar did improve that particular bike quite a bit off road though.

[sandyrs]

I would definitely be intrigued to try this. I've had way more issues with short wheelbase bikes not keeping both wheels on the ground than I've ever had with any kind of bike not "turning fast enough."

You can't make the turn on technical terrain if you can't keep both wheels on the ground through the turn, although in my case I think the answer is probably longer chainstays + shorter top tube and front center. I think he's talking about 2 out of 3 of those here but not necessarily all 3.

It also explains why I didn't like the Jones Loop H-bar I tried on my bike.. the bike I tried it on is too long to begin with so I wasn't going to be able to shift around like he advocates. When I did try to shift forward on it I ended up too far forward and off balance. That bar did improve that particular bike quite a bit off road though.

Funny enough you'll note that when they show him riding tight singletrack (https://youtu.be/kMkQ7z9Gi7c?t=266), he is lifting the rear wheel through hairpin turns.

[Villgaxx]

It intrigues me. I defiantly like shallow seat tube angles and head tube angles new bikes are getting shallower not steeper. I am seeing 67-69 as pretty common. Short stays are certainly in vogue right now.

too shallow seat tubes are awful in my experience, but rock on if you dig 'em.

and when we're talking "shallow" head tube angles with pretty huge travel forks, that's is not a 1982 mountain bike with a similar head angle and rigid fork and 26" wheels.

the key, my key, singular, for great handling off road is as short as possible rear end, proper seat angle, long top tube, short stem. the very long, very active modern forks make head angle less of an issue, for better or worse.

bigger wheels and longer suspension travel keep compromising ability to dial in proper seat position and wheelbase and everything else, but that's why there are new bikes and new designs.

but...if you get a really nice-handling hardtail you can ride just about anything. for me that's a bike with a super short rear, a not-too-shallow seat angle, a long top tube, and not-too-long stem.

[William]

Thanks for sharing!

Intriguing. I don't know about the handling equation, but I do know I dig the truss forks. :cool:







William

[stephenmarklay]

Funny enough you'll note that when they show him riding tight singletrack (https://youtu.be/kMkQ7z9Gi7c?t=266), he is lifting the rear wheel through hairpin turns.

I think in his commentary in that video he says that he is able to slide the rear more predictably. I think he showed it so that his long wheel base idea does not make people think it is just for straight lines.

[stephenmarklay]

too shallow seat tubes are awful in my experience, but rock on if you dig 'em.

and when we're talking "shallow" head tube angles with pretty huge travel forks, that's is not a 1982 mountain bike with a similar head angle and rigid fork and 26" wheels.

the key, my key, singular, for great handling off road is as short as possible rear end, proper seat angle, long top tube, short stem. the very long, very active modern forks make head angle less of an issue, for better or worse.

bigger wheels and longer suspension travel keep compromising ability to dial in proper seat position and wheelbase and everything else, but that's why there are new bikes and new designs.

but...if you get a really nice-handling hardtail you can ride just about anything. for me that's a bike with a super short rear, a not-too-shallow seat angle, a long top tube, and not-too-long stem..

I can't comment on what I really don't know. I like the shallow sta just to get behind the pedals. It also takes weight off the hands. My salsa though is about the bike you describe. I will add setback on the post however.