Good analysis, I have a mullet bike and after riding a few months your pretty spot on. It's great for open, flowy trails and speed. But it is just a tad harder to control on jumps and techy rock or curvy trails, smaller tires are just easier to control. I like the speed/control combo of the mullet.
Great down to earth analysis of mullets. I ran a 26 rear 27.5 front on my homebuilt full sus and agree with you it was initially a great ride .but I think the change was it was just a better fork that made it seem plusher and more stable .
You mentioned the balance of front-to-rear briefly in the video. It'd be grand to hear your opinion on similar (equal) chainstay to front triangle ratio on bikes.
I rode a 9er for 8 years, then tried 27.5 wheels and never looked back. Now I have trail and down-country bikes 27.5 front and back. It's the best of all worlds.
Steel is back and better than ever. I always new someone would see the benefits of steel. If I was younger and a better rider I'd have one of these and I'd have them paint it up as "lozenge camo". Screw the mullet.......
Steel corrodes and is much heavier than alternatives. This is why real bike companies don't make them, unless they're trying to jncrease profit margins because of how cheap the metal is.
Its obvious to me that you think you have the perfect geometry of all time and it should never be permitted to change. There is a old saying... If carbon was any good they would make aluminium from it and if aluminium was any good they would make steel from it but unobtainium is the ducks guts." Do you agree. and is E=Mtb²???
So you're not changing the geometry of your bike, just using two different triangles and mixing them together in the hopes of getting the correct geometry? So HA, SA, CS, BB height is the same as your safety bike? Sounds the same as using a different wheel size in the rear, just a different CS length. Also, your bikes are steel. Why? Is it because it's much more difficult to weld aluminum or because it's much less expensive than carbon? Both reasons, maybe? I've got a bike from the 1950s, it's steel also. Steel is an ancient material that doesn't have advantages over the alternatives and is known to corrode, especially if you live by the ocean. Funny.
Steel bikes have a cult because they are more compliant, in general. Also it suffers less fatigue then aluminium, in Enduro and other categories I've seen a lot of broken alu frames. Carbon manufacturing is only for high volume and suffers its complicities on its own. Is an >2000 euro steel frame then the best option? It depends I guess.
@SenorDelSol Steel flexes, that's why it's the material used to make bridges. Steel flexes so much that bikes companies like KHS used it to make soft-tails. The owner of Sterling started mountain biking just 7 years ago, so I'm confident he's unaware of what a soft-tail is.There's no benefit of having a frame flex when you're pedaling a bike with a rear shock. Shock "compliance" is being eliminated. Steel on a hardtail is a different conversation, though, I would argue that titanium is a more optimal material because it also flexes while being lighter and won't corrode. Which brings up enduro riding. Why would you want to pedal a flexing heavier and bike uphill? There are no advantages...
@@johnnyweekendDude why are you spending what precious little time you have in this life talking out of your ass about a bike youve clearly never ridden? If you dont dig the idea of a steel mtb you are free to look elsewhere man, no need to be spreading all these bad vibes
@starlingcycles835 I read it. Steel is STRONG. Steel also flexis A LOT. It's also incredibly cheap to manufacture, corrodes and is extremely heavy. I was also confused with the photos showing you with a weld torch. Your bikes are made in China, but you claim that you're manufacturing them. Makes as much sense as using a coil shock on a single pivot. Which makes as much sense as using Steel or Titanium on a full suspension mtb.
![[UA] NAVI vs MOUZ | BO5 | IEM Rio 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CMBYk0cbGoA/mqdefault.jpg)
Good analysis, I have a mullet bike and after riding a few months your pretty spot on. It's great for open, flowy trails and speed. But it is just a tad harder to control on jumps and techy rock or curvy trails, smaller tires are just easier to control. I like the speed/control combo of the mullet.
Great down to earth analysis of mullets. I ran a 26 rear 27.5 front on my homebuilt full sus and agree with you it was initially a great ride .but
I think the change was it was just a better fork that made it seem plusher and more stable .
Thanks for the video
(I preferred 29 but I use Mx because I was always touching the rear wheel with my but)
Joe, it’s good to have these updates and info sessions from you. Thanks and good luck. I have Factory Murmur #48. Love it!
You mentioned the balance of front-to-rear briefly in the video. It'd be grand to hear your opinion on similar (equal) chainstay to front triangle ratio on bikes.
I rode a 9er for 8 years, then tried 27.5 wheels and never looked back. Now I have trail and down-country bikes 27.5 front and back. It's the best of all worlds.
Thanks for the video! How old is Joe McEwan now?
hello Joe, can you suggest a L murmur v2 ( 485 reach) for a 173 rider if using a super short stem? is the 1260WB too long? thank you
The most interesting thing is that we've recently seen a lot of pro's switching back to full 29ers. All the fastest enduro boys run 29ers.
I wish there were mullets with 29" rear wheel and 32" or 36" front wheel.
Have you been watching Sam Pilgrim?
@@thomasstone1363 you spelt simping wrong
@@janeblogs324 I don't understand what you mean
Steel is back and better than ever. I always new someone would see the benefits of steel. If I was younger and a better rider I'd have one of these and I'd have them paint it up as "lozenge camo". Screw the mullet.......
Steel corrodes and is much heavier than alternatives. This is why real bike companies don't make them, unless they're trying to jncrease profit margins because of how cheap the metal is.
Right, so 26er it is then 😅
what is wrong with the picture every 2 minutes it shifts to VHS quality..?? wha is that? okay i stopped watching it :D
🤣 Form over function ;-)
Its obvious to me that you think you have the perfect geometry of all time and it should never be permitted to change. There is a old saying... If carbon was any good they would make aluminium from it and if aluminium was any good they would make steel from it but unobtainium is the ducks guts." Do you agree. and is E=Mtb²???
That's a frakenbike. Mullet has been been a bike company since 2017 👍
So you're not changing the geometry of your bike, just using two different triangles and mixing them together in the hopes of getting the correct geometry? So HA, SA, CS, BB height is the same as your safety bike? Sounds the same as using a different wheel size in the rear, just a different CS length. Also, your bikes are steel. Why? Is it because it's much more difficult to weld aluminum or because it's much less expensive than carbon? Both reasons, maybe? I've got a bike from the 1950s, it's steel also. Steel is an ancient material that doesn't have advantages over the alternatives and is known to corrode, especially if you live by the ocean. Funny.
Steel bikes have a cult because they are more compliant, in general. Also it suffers less fatigue then aluminium, in Enduro and other categories I've seen a lot of broken alu frames. Carbon manufacturing is only for high volume and suffers its complicities on its own. Is an >2000 euro steel frame then the best option? It depends I guess.
@SenorDelSol Steel flexes, that's why it's the material used to make bridges. Steel flexes so much that bikes companies like KHS used it to make soft-tails. The owner of Sterling started mountain biking just 7 years ago, so I'm confident he's unaware of what a soft-tail is.There's no benefit of having a frame flex when you're pedaling a bike with a rear shock. Shock "compliance" is being eliminated. Steel on a hardtail is a different conversation, though, I would argue that titanium is a more optimal material because it also flexes while being lighter and won't corrode. Which brings up enduro riding. Why would you want to pedal a flexing heavier and bike uphill? There are no advantages...
@@johnnyweekendDude why are you spending what precious little time you have in this life talking out of your ass about a bike youve clearly never ridden? If you dont dig the idea of a steel mtb you are free to look elsewhere man, no need to be spreading all these bad vibes
@@johnnyweekend Here's our case for why Steel works for Starling - have a read www.starlingcycles.com/why-steel-mountain-bike-frames/
@starlingcycles835 I read it. Steel is STRONG. Steel also flexis A LOT. It's also incredibly cheap to manufacture, corrodes and is extremely heavy. I was also confused with the photos showing you with a weld torch. Your bikes are made in China, but you claim that you're manufacturing them. Makes as much sense as using a coil shock on a single pivot. Which makes as much sense as using Steel or Titanium on a full suspension mtb.