The Riding Gravel Forum
Register Calendar Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Smale Rider

Starter
Registered:
Posts: 18
Reply with quote  #1 
https://www.bikerumor.com/2017/01/10/first-look-new-niner-rlt-9-rdo-adventure-ready-carbon-gravel-race-bike/

Looks like they finally go this guy in carbon. In the process they seem to have squished it inward, making the top-tube sloped down more, dropping the BB down, and making the rear a little bit tighter.

Its nice that the ditched that traditional frame geometry, the 47 now actually makes some sense now.

Downsides it seems that we lost wheel clearance in the back, down to a 40mm now, however front fork is the same, so still good clearance there still.

Niner explicitly state that the bike can run 650B tires, but we lost one of the best 650B wheels (WTB Horizon), and only seem to be holding now 650b g-one and gravelkings, which is less than exciting.

Given how inner rim diameter can effect wheel width is 650b even worth running? Best carbon option I have found is ENVE at 21mm internal. Most other rims are running 23mm
0
ljsmith

Member
Registered:
Posts: 57
Reply with quote  #2 
It seems to me the future of gravel bikes (or whatever you want to call them) is bikes that can fit 650b x 2.1 and 700 x 40 (or larger) tires.  I don't know why anyone would come out with a new frame that cannot do that.  
0
alembical

Member
Registered:
Posts: 37
Reply with quote  #3 
I think at some point, we will see just as much variation in the gravel bike market that we do in Mountain or road.  The more options the better.  Many people will never run 40+ and might prefer a shorter or stiffer build.  

My bike can take 40 and I was just contemplating 650b for my second wheelset, feeling that 2 different wheelsets would make even more sense.  Then I realized that I don't really want to run fatter tires than that and went with another 700 wheelset.  I set of wheels with 28 smooth tread and one with 35-38 treaded just make more sense for me and my riding. 
0
ljsmith

Member
Registered:
Posts: 57
Reply with quote  #4 
Maybe its just me, but I see the "all road" or "adventure" categories as being more road-like with smaller <38c tires.  To me a gravel bike needs to be able to run a lot of variety of tires because gravel routes can be vastly different.  I suppose bike companies would ideally like you to have 10 gravel bikes each one with a dedicated tire size.  But for bikes that would all have similar geometry, no suspension and just different tires sizes, it seems to make more sense to have 1 bike that can take different tire/wheel sizes.  The various types of mountain bikes differ by suspension travel, geometry and tire size, so even though companies have tried, its really difficult to make a do everything mountain bike.  Just my 2 cents.
0
DerekJ_MI

Member
Registered:
Posts: 25
Reply with quote  #5 
Anyone know what this new bike is going to weigh?
0
ljsmith

Member
Registered:
Posts: 57
Reply with quote  #6 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DerekJ_MI
Anyone know what this new bike is going to weigh?


Jenson specs the frame/fork/seatclamp/axles at 1850g. Thats about 200g heavier than a BSB.
0
RobF

Starter
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #7 
Making a note here in case anyone else has this question.

Per bikerumor, the RLT 9 Steel frameset weight is 2.99kg.
As ljsmith said, Jenson puts the RLT 9 RDO framset at 1.85kg.

So carbon is 1.14 kg (2.5lbs) lighter than my 853 Steel.

I'm interested in reports on how the ride quality compares, especially on 100mile+ efforts.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: