Results 1 to 20 of 45
14-06-13, 11:56 #1
Why aren't we having a wheel size debate on BM?
Odd isn't it. Frankly, watching the other sites it would appear that the summary is the 29 is better / rolls easier for longer flatter sections, 26 for the tight and twisty's and 650b for a compromise of both (either good or bad depending on your view). I'm interested to see that the new Trek Fuel / Remedy frames have been altered to provide and overall 26 wheelbase yet with 29er wheels, not sure what that proves?
However, I'm beginning to accept / get bored of the arguments with the conclusion actually being (with the exception of long distance non technical riding in favour of the 29er) the difference for Joe average is pretty negotiable.
What are your thoughts?
14-06-13, 12:00 #2
we did have one, and agree it was all as you said above really.
14-06-13, 13:17 #3
I think you've got the riding technical stuff ona 29er bit very wrong! but then again riding technical stuff 'is not about the bike'.
I'm certain 650b will become the future.
No idea about Downhill or All mountain bikes, I'm sure if they can make the bigger wheels stiff/burly enough to cope with the World Cup Courses without being stupid heavy they will start changing over.
14-06-13, 13:33 #4
As I've mentioned before, one of the main reasons I've been saying 650b is coming for years was following a chat with some very respected frame builders (from Fat Chance & Klein) at a bike show back in the mid-nineties. They all agreed that it was the best start point for frame design & build but were stuck with 26" as that was the accepted 'standard' by default.
with regard to the 'discernable difference' argument, I see that as no different to the same discussion re suspension travel i.e. why is 120mm better than 100mm? Many 29er evangelists have stated that the difference in wheel size equates to 30-40mm of travel in the way it deals with lumps & bumps so it's fair to assume the 'in between' size would be aroung half that. This suggests that a 650b with 100mm travel could ride like a 26er with 120mm but gives the builder more control over angles, strength requirements, weight etc.
The conspiracy theory from the U.S. surrounding the advent of 29ers is well known already but every time I see another 650b based product mentioned it actually gains credibility.
At the end of the day. there are so many 26" bikes in the world that it'll be a very long time before they become obselete. 29ers on the other hand, may be the victims in all of this...
14-06-13, 13:48 #5
14-06-13, 14:22 #6
*Has a think................................nope, don't give a toss as, at my age, I won't be looking towards minor improvements in performance. In 10yrs time, riding at all will be an acheivment!*
14-06-13, 14:31 #7
I also seem to recall that Pat Clark (of Clark-Kent Frames) advocated the 650b & may have produced a Ti frame which could take them.
14-06-13, 16:11 #8
All I know about 29ers is that a couple of pals have got them and their performance up hills has completely improved. So much so that I recently vowed to get fit enough to beat them on my 30lb Epic and know that I was fit.
So (I am a bit over competitive you see!), I started pushing a few training rides recently and then last week on a 25mile ride out to Holmbury hill, I started to push and they started to whine and finally fell away......left them 200 yds behind!
So the moral of the story is that if you stick to your 26er, beat your mates on 29ers and you will feel great and they will feel shit! If they beat you on a 29er....its meaningless!
14-06-13, 16:51 #9
14-06-13, 18:50 #10
All I know is that a 26 incher with fuck off big tyres is effectively a 650b
14-06-13, 19:20 #11
But hey what do I know , I was touting the virtues of 29ers years ago when you lot were mostly heaping scorn on the idea .
14-06-13, 21:32 #12
650b is just a marginal difference over 26 that convinces people it doesnt have the turn in issues of a lwb 29.
Indeed it's not about the bike, it's about the marketing and probably more importantly like any bike without is components, about the frame.
14-06-13, 22:15 #13
Way too many assumptions there Stan . I was actually convinced of the advantages of the 29er by riding them , nothing more , at the Trek launch in 2011 in Austria when Gary Fisher himself got me to ride a 26in bike round a prepared circuit and then a 29er . I don't consider myself a "victim" because I have an open mind to new technology and am prepared to try out new ideas rather than reading various reviews and other peoples opinions then selecting what I want to believe and not believe to form my opinion .
14-06-13, 22:37 #14
In other news the child bought me one of those Park Workstands for Fathers day so I just rebuilt my Trek Elite hardtail...it feels like fucking BMX and about half the weight of my 29er! I'm racing ont he weekend but next opportunity I get I'm going to take both of them up to the forest and give them a jolly going thrashing.
Strava reckons I'm out and out faster on the 'Elite' but my legs feel i'm faster for less on the 'Reaction'.
I bet you £100 when I go back on the elite I'll be a 26er convert, for the grin factor alone.
15-06-13, 09:55 #15
the child bought me one of those Park Workstands for Fathers day
Precocious but bang on the money, your little 'un.
15-06-13, 10:22 #16
15-06-13, 10:27 #17
I'll be riding 26ers for a while as will most people. I realise that at certain points on a trail they are slower than a 29er and there are parts where they are quicker as I also find that my 3 MTB's cover the ground at different speeds.
Therefore why change unless you need a new bike ?
15-06-13, 11:18 #18
15-06-13, 17:28 #19
15-06-13, 17:55 #20
Nobby did you find a 9spd half link from somewhere?