Its still a crap explanation form me and I do apologise for that. 4 hrs sleep in 36
TJ, I understand the gist of the explanation OK.
It's just that the cycnical side of me just sees 29" wheels/tyres/forks/framesets as an added retail opportunity rather than an appreciable advance in bike ergonomics 
If it was that obvious surely someoine would have 'come up with it' a bit sooner ??
Well... work done = force * distance
I'm pretty sure it ends up being more energy for the big wheeled case...
then why does no one make a 32" wheel
There's an optimum length for the wheelbase otherwise the bike would handle like a barge. Would have thought 29in wheels would be the max you could fit without having to stretch out that wheelbase.
Other problems would be toe overlap - esp. on smaller frame sizes.
Big wheels roll better - but given that people don't ride in straight lines and ride at variable speeds over different kinds of terrain it becomes a bit more complicated than bigger is better.
This is a picture of my 29er. It is fast on the flat and just seems to keep going. In the snow it was 100% better than my 26 mountain bike as it just seems to grip.
Handles like a gate though.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
