At last a new wheel standard that will actually mean you can keep your old frame rather than have to “invest” in a new one.As seen at the core bike report, should match the 29+ front in a 29er frame nicely & “summer-ise” a fat bike

Excellent for those of use keen on the 29+ idea but being shorter of leg (sorry – seen too many 5’8″ and under owners with stupid looking set-ups). I’m keeping my eye on new bikes coming along and might just opt for a custom Ti job. Really needs rear axle and bb/crank length standards to settle down though.

I might throw a set of wheels into my 9zero7 as a starter for 10.

Yep, our new tandem will run 650B+ for rough off road, and 29 for fast off road touring.

It is interesting to me. They seem to have missed the entire point of new wheelsizes though (ie, making people buy new bikes) The difficulty will probably be in knowing what frames they fit?

Northwind – Member

It is interesting to me. They seem to have missed the entire point of new wheelsizes though (ie, making people buy new bikes) The difficulty will probably be in knowing what frames they fit?
Note that they’ve waited until everyone is on 27.5 though 😉
We’ll see no end of ‘nuskool’ 29er reviews over the next year that state that there’s no downsides over 27.5

For some reason nobody seems interested in running 26+ in 27.5 frames, which would be an obvious way to make use of old, but good wheels.

+ wheel sizes usually involve much fatter rims than “old, but good” wheels will have.

I’ve missed this. Link please.

not really, is it like fat bike lite?

CoreBike2015 Part1

http://twentynineinches.com/2014/05/19/wtb-pushes-b-wheel-size-with-new-tirerim/

WTB and the (650)B+ thing.

The buzz at the moment, isn’t 27.5in wheels (they’re sooo 2014) and it’s not even 29 x 3in (29+) – no, expect to hear a lot more about 27.5in wheels with 2.8 tyres and wide rims. They’ll fit (mostly) into a 29er bike, but offer huge amounts of rubber, tread, cushioning and traction. While we’re not convinced yet (having never ridden one) we know that there are many big players poised to make this their next big thing. A lot.
hmm, no not really.

Brant has published a few photos of prototype rims & tyres on instagram in the last few weeks too

What about Bryant?

Light bicycles are working on a 27.5 version of their 50mm 29+ rim, then 26+ after Chinese New Year

I couldn’t give a stuff about 650B+, but I’ve got a Stans Hugo on pre-order. 26+ front for a rigid SS. Steering is very quick at the moment with the fork on the short side, so a wee bit of calming won’t be a bad thing.

Slight concerns about some early rim derfs in the US, though. Fingers crossed it’s just lardy yanks who can’t ride…

For some reason nobody seems interested in running 26+ in 27.5 frames, which would be an obvious way to make use of old, but good wheels.

Instigator…

The issue you have is there isn’t enough of a difference between 26in and 650B (it’s not 27.5) so a 26×2.8/3in tyre (on a wiiiiiiide rim) would likely not fit in a frame designed for a 650Bx2.5 oon a normal rim.

There is much more of a difference between 650B and 700C (29), but you are still going to find some 29ers having fag paper clearances around a 650Bx2.8in tyre or it not fitting.

he issue you have is there isn’t enough of a difference between 26in and 650B (it’s not 27.5)

If you’re going to be pedantic, 26″ has been wrong for the last 10years. 650b is 27.5″ (ish, plenty of tyres are 28″ and above), but 26″ has grown from when it was nominaly 26″.

Yah, but 26 is historically wrong, whereas 27.5 was chosen to be misleading.

And **** you, kittens!

rOcKeTdOg – Member

…”summer-ise” a fat bike

29 does that.

rOcKeTdOg – Member

At last a new wheel standard that will actually mean you can keep your old frame rather than have to “invest” in a new one

Ooooh. It will fit both my 26″ wheeled bikes, will it?

Great…a new “standard”…but wait, we don’t have to throw away our year old frame and forks?

This is actually good news and real choice from the bike industry for once. I bet SRAM or Trek had nothing to do with it.

from what I’ve heard/read, a 2.8 tire won’t fit in a vast majority of 29er frames…

Ooooh. It will fit both my 26″ wheeled bikes, will it?

Possibly not. I remember reading that Surly found the fork with the biggest clearance – Fox something or other, then made a tyre that would just fit into the arch on a 50mm rim (2.75″) then designed the back end of the frame around the same rim/tyre combo.

I suspect the tyre size isn’t much like 2.75″, but having those numbers in that order was too good an opportunity to miss!

anyone else excited by B

Nope! I prefer

I’d really like to try it on my Sultan, I reckon it would clear ok it’s just quite a big out lay to do it properly and then find it isn’t all that.

rOcKeTdOg – Member

At last a new wheel standard that will actually mean you can keep your old frame rather than have to “invest” in a new one.

… assuming you own a 29er of course 😉

There’ll be a whole load of “jump on the 650B bandwagon” riders who will find that B+ tyres won’t fit their pride and joy frame. Not to mention the majority who still ride 26″.

I literally have no idea what all these “standards” are, and I don’t care 😀

rOcKeTdOg – Member
…”summer-ise” a fat bike
29 does that.

Not decent sized tyres, not in the back of a fatty anyway & certainly not 29+

stumpy01 – Member
rOcKeTdOg – Member
At last a new wheel standard that will actually mean you can keep your old frame rather than have to “invest” in a new one
Ooooh. It will fit both my 26″ wheeled bikes, will it?

I reckon it’ll fit a 26″ wanga with the dropouts pushed right back, but otherwise another nail in the 26″ coffin I guess

So many ways for this to be nothing more than a case of ‘the Emperors new clothes’….we’ll see how it pans out!

If the 2.7 – 3.0 tyres have no more tread width than a conventional 2.4 – 2.5 then B+ will be pointless on anything other than a hardtail and then only for comfort reasons…

If the sidewalls on these new tyres protrudes further out than the tread width or the tread doesnt extend down onto the shoulder then they will be a recipe for disaster in rocky areas as the oversized walls get torn to shreds…

If the masses decide that B+ tyres are great for comfort and start fitting them to their full-sussers then it will demonstrate excellenty that most people havent got a clue how to set their suspension up properly…rigids and hardtails are the exception here, B+ seems a reasonable idea for those bikes…

If the B+ tyres weigh less than Nokian Gazzoloddis from when we did this the first time round then great, however if they do seem prone to tearing and too weak for DH/Enduro use then reinforced sidewalls, dual-ply etc will be needed and could make them very heavy, interested to see just how far we have (or havent) come with tyre tech in this regard…

If B+ tyres on wide rims lead to a completely square profile once on the wheels they will be a pig to turn and draggy as hell on the flat, most fatbike riders admit to being slower on the ‘fatty’ than on a conventional bike but insist this isnt the point or a problem as its about the fun they’re having…fair enough but if its the same for B+ then i’m out, i’m slow enough already without being hindered by oversized tyres…

What does Bplus do? Heavier and draggier with less damped suspension, or did I miss something? Or is it a fat bike love child thing?

I’ll be giving it a go and building a B+ for the back of my Stooge pretty soon I reckon.

I assume all the people saying bigger tires are too heavy and draggy are on 1.9s?

What does Bplus do? Heavier and draggier with less damped suspension, or did I miss something? Or is it a fat bike love child thing?

As previously stated, for me it fits in the back of my current 29er frame with the 29+ front & my fat bike. I don’t care about 26/27.5/FS permutations

deviant – Member

If the 2.7 – 3.0 tyres have no more tread width than a conventional 2.4 – 2.5 then B+ will be pointless on anything other than a hardtail and then only for comfort reasons…

Tyre volume isn’t just about comfort 😕 A bigger, lower pressure tyre forms to the ground better. Combined with slow rebounding rubber, that’s a good combo. It’s not the same but I used to run a 2.5 stick-e nevegal singleply at low pressure on a rigid bike, and yep I did it for comfort/boing but zomfg teh gripz! At low speed it just glommed over roots in a fairly absurd way, lines that i’ve never got to work on any other bike could make sense. Terribly flawed in other ways obviously but then, I was bodging it, I’m sure some of that postitive stuff could be brought to a less disasterous package.

glommed

Excellent word!

No.

It’s picking your line through root and rock strewn descent sections where you’ll have the most fun on the Instigator. It’ll still happily belt down hardpack downhills and jump reasonably well, but push hard into turns and the squirm from those giant tyres can be really quite unsettling at speed.

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/category/bikes/mountain-bikes/hardtail/product/review-surly-instigator-2-0-14-48140/

picking quotes to suit your argument is easy 😉

For those looking for something simple and fun to ride technical terrain on, the Instigator 2.0 is definitely worth a look.

Can I join in?

We found ourselves cleaning awkward, nadgery technical climbs that we’d previously struggled with, with relative ease thanks to the traction-rich tyres.

It’ll claw its way over rocks and roots without any fuss

Easy to check if your 29er will fit WTB 2.8 on a 40-45mm rim – at ~320mm from your axle you’ll need 67mm plus any clearance needed each side. The tread OD is 725mm and since the tread itself is similar width to most 2.25 tyres that area shouldn’t be too much issue for clearance. There’s also 10-12mm more BB drop compared to a 29er.

WTB did a cool thing making the Trailblazer as a try-out that fits some 29ers. It seems that B+ has been presented in places as a swap-out option for 29ers but it looks about as cross-compatible as 26″ and 650B – possible but often not ideal.

If the 2.7 – 3.0 tyres have no more tread width than a conventional 2.4 – 2.5 then B+ will be pointless on anything other than a hardtail and then only for comfort reasons…

Comfort, plus potentially lower rolling resistance. If you want more tread, the chunkier Traxx Fatty 3.25 (closer to 3.0 on the i45 rim) won’t fit current 29ers. The 2.8 is a squeeze in a lot of them.

Hard to say where it’ll really ‘fit in’ but safe to say that it’s the new thing to jump on for future model ranges.

You really need to ride some 3″ tyres on a rigid bike before passing judgement. Imagining what they would be like on your 140mm full-susser is missing the point. It’s not about comfort at all as you still rattle like hell flying over root gardens and rocks, but what you do get is amazing grip that allows you to rail corners and clear super-techy climbs. You also finish every ride with a silly grin on your face.

Here’s mine, 29+ but still the same principal, 10-12psi front and back is the sweet spot…

Does the B stand for Bollox or Bullshit? If you don’t finish every ride on a half decent bike with a smile on your face you’re doing something wrong.