In a few years time, 26″ bikes will only be spotted at trail centres and other facilities purpose-built for them.

Nonsense! There are plenty or cyclists around who possess imagination, ambition and map reading skills and want to ride mountain bikes in mountains, not round and round fake trails like hamsters in wheels. My guess is that these true mountain bikers will be using tried and tested lightweight old-school XC bikes and won’t be interested in posing around on the latest marketing-inspired overweight novelty.

Those are the words of someone who really doesn’t know what they are talking about.

Maybe, maybe not. My current bike has an ‘oversized’ headtube and headset. Apparently it makes it stiffer and handle better.

What a load of marketing b@llocks its just a way to get people thinking they NEED a new bike.

To some degree its irrelevant what kit pros are winning on, yes some technology will help, but a lot of the time they ride what they are told to sell more bikes.

What advantage does a 2*er (insert whatever) have if everyone is racing them?

I’d honestly prefer to see the UCI step in and have different classes for each wheel size then let’s see what people actually prefer to ride when there’s no racing advantage.

Check out what real mountain bikers were using before the US-led drive to 26″ wheels arrived.

Druid & Njee. I have to disagree with:

“There is no inherent “magic” about the choice of a 26″ wheel size. It’s a question of what was available when the guys in the States were first getting in to marketing “Mountain Biking” and it was then adopted everywhere. If they had chosen 650B or 700(29) then we’d not be having this discussion now.”

Cynically, I think we would be having almost exactly the same argument, with a slight difference… We would be replacing the 26″ with 650b or 700 and arguing that 26 was the future!

Why…? It’s the science of marketing and simple human nature – it’s what we do as a society composed of a group of consumers.

A few months back, there was a review in one of the mags of a spoke key. The journo said he had rarely needed one until he started riding 29ers, but now he was trueing wheels all the time. I bend enough 26 inch wheels as it is and won’t be able to afford strong enough 29er wheels at a weight I feel would be acceptable so I’ll be riding 26ers for the foreseeable. Nothing against 29ers and don’t really understand the hate, but until the rules of physics and metallurgy suddenly change, I become anorexic or start riding xcjc, I’m sticking not twisting.

I’m just waiting for muddyfunster to kick the door down and burst in here screaming and windmilling

My main bike is a Rocket, a small frame and I really like it.
I test rode a ‘small’ prototype Solaris. I’m 5’6″ and it felt too big, like I was getting taken for a ride rather than riding it.
Conclusion of Cy seemed to be that 29ers probably aren’t suitable for short arses. So thats one reason that I can imagine both 29″ and 26″ existing side by side.

To some degree its irrelevant what kit pros are winning on, yes some technology will help, but a lot of the time they ride what they are told to sell more bikes

Don’t you see the end result of this though? It’s worked this way for years. The top riders ride what they are told and then punters buy those self same bikes and components. If all the big bike manufacturers stopped making two wheeled bikes and focused on unicycles, you’d be seeing a whole load more unicyclists on the hills and trail centres.

To draw another analogy, is the advent of 29ers going to be the same as when the ski industry moved to “carving” skis? For a few years there were still plenty of old school skis on the slopes (me included) but they’re a rare breed now.

Not a great argument. If bigger is better why stop at 29″ wheels. What’s wrong with 32″ wheels?

I don’t think many people are particularly ‘anti’, but some people don’t like having a certain standard rammed down their throats.

You misunderstand my argument – I’m not saying 29er is right, just that what makes anything that isn’t 26″ wrong?

Maybe, maybe not. My current bike has an ‘oversized’ headtube and headset. Apparently it makes it stiffer and handle better.

That is much closer to marketing bollocks. It’s either a comparative statement to a previous incarnation that same bike, or a meaningless word.

I don’t get the hate either – I have both and intend to continue doing so.

It’s worked this way for years. The top riders ride what they are told and then punters buy those self same bikes and components.

That isn’t how it works though, that’s how people think it works.

Scott developed a 650B Scale just for Nino Schurter, who wanted the larger wheels of a 29er, but couldn’t get low enough at the front end. That’s not for sale yet, so having your world champion riding it is a little daft when there’s a 26″ and a 29″ model.

His “conclusion” was that the smaller 29er didn’t suit a particular style of riding but was good for “long days eating up miles” or words to that effect. I believe that a small Solaris is now en route.

Well Druidh, that isn’t what he said to me, but regardless, my point remains, both will exist. We need the 29er for mincers like you.

http://www.cotic.co.uk/product/solaris

BRIGHT GREEN STOCK COMING SOON…

[INCLUDING NEW SMALL SIZE].

Those of you who get our newsletter (sign up at our contact page) will know that we have been working on this for a while. Paul is 5ft 8in and loves his small Soul, and Kate Potter (our tame World Cup racer) is 5ft 6in and loves her small Soda. They’ve done the work on this, and Paul in particular struggled to get happy with the bike. After some fairly major fiddling with the handling, we homed in on the main issue surrounding the front end handling. Basically we ended up with a slacker head angle than the other sizes. The short stem required once all the other requirements were balanced up made the handling a bit of a handful with the original head angle, so we backed it off 1 degree. Paul ended up with a 50mm stem on the bike and with the slacker head angle it has a nice feel, and it also allows us to shorten the top tube a little without running into fork clearance issues or a stupidly short front centre. It’s still not as playful as the Soul, and we still maintain our original position that for shorter people 29er and 26er bikes are very different things.

What we’ve realised from talking to potential customers is that they’re happy with the 29er compromise erring towards easy rolling and stability, so once we got a set up that felt good for Paul we’ve gone ahead. Kate – coming from a more racey point of view – absolutely loves hers as it is very quick and confidence inspiring on rocky and downhill sections compared to her usual Soda

And the quote I was referring to

If Paul wanted a light, comfortable, efficient thing for crossing a map, then the 29er would be good.

Sorry if I didn’t manage it verbatim.

Scott developed a 650B Scale just for Nino Schurter, who wanted the larger wheels of a 29er, but couldn’t get low enough at the front end. That’s not for sale yet

“Yet” being the operative word. As I said above, the Scott Genius is only available in 27.5 or 29in. Give it time.

Did I really read on this thread that its an American marketing idea as they mostly ride fire roads? God give me strength….. 🙄

I have no idea whether 26ers are a dying breed. I assume that the result will be a combination between the pull of what people want and the push of what companies will try to sell us in the name of innovation! FWIW, I find 29ers suit me better, but feel that is purely a personal choice.

Have to agree with druidh’s comments in the previous page. And to extend the thought process further, I was thinking about the bikes used in the Olympic MTB event. The TV must have flattened the reality and I would hazard a guess that the course encompasses up to 90% of what most recreational riders encounter at the most gnarr level!!!! And this was ridden on XC bikes – not sure of the breakdown between 26/29 or HT/FS. Made me wonder why so many UK recreational riders chose AM beasts and even trail bikes, to a lesser extent? And then ride stuff much less challenging than this.

Just an observation and not a dig/criticism in any way at people who ride big suss bikes but I will be interested to see if the bike world moves make towards less suspension and weight (ie closer to current XC) as the default option for 90% of us? Especially given the feel of extra suspension that a 29 brings. IMO this is probably the biggest impact of 29ers.

& did you also read on another thread that Santa is real……………… 🙄

26″ will always be around, afterall not everyone is normal size, some people stop growing at 5ft6″!!

Someone said he’s not real? 😯

but I will be interested to see if the bike world moves make towards less suspension and weight

My experience of (trying to) lift a 2013 Stumpy off the shop floor suggests not. Bikes seem to be getting burlier/heavier, which is a shame ‘cos I’m an old school rider who firmly believes weight matters.

“Yet” being the operative word. As I said above, the Scott Genius is only available in 27.5 or 29in. Give it time.

But do you accept that it is his choice? Scott didn’t say to him “you must ride this 650b Scale so we can sell hundreds to our gullible punters”?

Have to agree with druidh’s comments in the previous page. And to extend the thought process further, I was thinking about the bikes used in the Olympic MTB event. The TV must have flattened the reality and I would hazard a guess that the course encompasses up to 90% of what most recreational riders encounter at the most gnarr level!!!! And this was ridden on XC bikes – not sure of the breakdown between 26/29 or HT/FS. Made me wonder why so many UK recreational riders chose AM beasts and even trail bikes, to a lesser extent?

I’m not sure you can really compare the Olympic XC course to most riding ‘normal’ folk do – there were some excellent technical features, but they were interspersed with smoother terrain, and being ridden by some great riders seeking all out speed. Hardtails were very much order of the day, only a few FS (including Kulhavy). I don’t think that translates to your average trail centre rider though.

I have a feeling 650b is going to displace 26er for long travel/hardcore frames, and the rest will be 29.

But there’ll still be 26ers knocking about for a few years, just in decline.

I’m just waiting for muddyfunster to kick the door down and burst in here screaming and windmilling

he does get himself in a tizzy that guy!

My next bike will almost certainly be a 29er, because the trails I ride the most suit them and they fit me better than a 26″. Were you out on your road bike near Hope yesterday Dan?

Nope, it wasn’t me Sam. I wish it was, but I was tucked up at work 🙁

Off to Cannock tomorrow for test rides. 26er or 29er? 😆

Sorry njee, I didn’t explain myself well! My point was if the obstacles on the Oly MTB course can be handled well on typical XC bikes, and if they are probably as hard/harder than obstacles that 90% of Uk riders face on their normal rides (even Sweary riders!), then why do people chose all the xtra weight and suspension.

I accept that the skill levels are incomparable but wonder if one of the biggest hype words is skill-compensator. I see it among my friends with a move away fron “aggressive” set ups and feel that 29ers with their feel of added suspension has something to do worth this.

OOI, do you think that 90% of riders leaving walking bottom CP would be best suited on an XC, trail or all AM bike? How does the actual split match our first answer!?!

Anyway doesn’t take away from the central idea that it’s best determined by individual choice!

My next bike will almost certainly be a 29er, because the trails I ride the most suit them and they fit me better than a 26″.

I just hate it when I’ve taken the 26″ & realise the trail is more suited to a 29er,just ruins the ride it does…………..

Off to Cannock tomorrow for test rides. 26er or 29er?

Both!

then why do people chose all the xtra weight and suspension.

I think there’s all sorts of reasons for that, chief among them the skill and what they’re seeking – yes people can get down things perfectly capably on a race bike, but what if they want to be a bit more enthusiastic, take the jump line, or just not worry about fragile kit?

OOI, do you think that 90% of riders leaving walking bottom CP would be best suited on an XC, trail or all AM bike? How does the actual split match our first answer!?!

Best suited how? Those trails can virtually all be ridden on a ‘cross bike, but that doesn’t mean everyone would be more ‘suited’ to one. I personally think my bike (light 4″ FS) is pretty brilliant round there – but to be honest if I had a slightly more slack 5″ travel bike I’d probably take that sometimes – depending on who I was riding with. Most of the guys I ride with regularly are faster than me, so I don’t really want to give away any advantage, I’ll usually keep my race wheels on in fact. If I go out with the guys from the shop they’re virtually all slower than me, so I’d be happier taking a bigger bike, it’s not really a hindrance on the climb as I’m not getting left behind anyway. Horses for courses and that.

Plenty of people you see around Peaslake are riding >6″ travel bikes, with dropper posts etc. Personally I think that’s over kill, but as long as they enjoy it then they’re on the most suitable bike.

I know exactly what you’re saying, and I don’t disagree that people over estimate the sort of bike they ‘need’ for certain riding, but I think that’s a different thing.

Totally agree njee (you will also appreciate where I am coming from, from previous threads about bike choice).

OOI what is your 4″ FS is you don’t mind me asking?

Funnily enough, I was chatting with a mate this morning who bought a fuel ex last year and now finds he really wants a 29 HT for most of his riding. I guess there are a few of us with the same “what bike” conundrum riding SHs!!! 😉

On the subject of previous threads, the latest WMR did a review on Trance 29er and concluded it was an ideal choice for SH.

I just hate it when I’ve taken the 26″ & realise the trail is more suited to a 29er,just ruins the ride it does…………..

I realise that was meant tongue-in-cheek, but actually that’s exactly the worry I have. Will I regret going one way or the other with the next bike purchase? I’ve been out on my last full susser and wished I had the other bike and vice versa. Is the 26 v 29 difference so significant that I’d have the same worries? As I said above, it’s a choice I’d rather not have to make

OOI what is your 4″ FS is you don’t mind me asking?

This Top Fuel

Surely if there is a demand for 26in bikes then there are always going to be enterprising people making them. It’s only if the demand goes that production will cease.
Yes the choice may be a bit more limited, but if the naysayers are adamant they won’t try a 29er then stick with your 26er. There’s no need for all this bickering. It’s like the mtb’er – roadie thing. Just ride what you enjoy riding ffs. We all ride different terrain at different speeds for different reasons. But we all ride because we enjoy it.
I don’t think they’ll ever make it law that you can’t choose your own bike wheel size…

I simply couldn’t care really what sized wheels are on my bike(s). The wheel size is only one small part in the jigsaw as to how a bike (and rider) perform. In extremis, (like say a profesional TB race etc) then tiny tiny optimisations (like 26″ vs 650B) possibly make a difference. To you and I ?? er no they don’t!

I’ve got a slack AM bike, a slack HT bike, and a totaly not slack race HT. Guess what, down a mountian it’s AM – HT – RACE, but along a smooth fireroad its RACE-HT-AM. Not really suprising.

So, yes, a 29r HT might be slightly faster than an equivalent 26r HT, but say a race bike would be minutes faster.

Pick the bike(s) that fit your riding the best, and get out and enjoy it 😉

It’s hard enough getting the right geometry and standover on small frames as it is with 26″

And with my small size and lack of testosterone-fuelled power, acceleration is quite hard enough.

There probably always be a market for 26″ wheels, even it’s just short-arses like me….

….although saying that I wouldn’t rule out a change to 650B as that does seem, dare I say it, like a good middle ground. But 29″? No ta, too big for the fun stuff.

OOI?
SH?

It’s hard enough getting the right geometry and standover on small frames as it is with 26″

I know of atleast one petite person who loves her 29er. Everyone likes their bikes different I guess.

Message to the industry – please don’t drop the 26er or even downgrade it – we are not all tall enough for 29ers, which may be fine for the larger gentleman and lady

I simply couldn’t care really what sized wheels are on my bike(s). The wheel size is only one small part in the jigsaw as to how a bike (and rider) perform.

Amen! And on top of that ‘performance’ is only a small part of why some (most?) of us pick a bike. Making best time A to B offroad requires a cyclocross bike. Most *mountain biking* I see in the wilds of Quantox, Mendips, and Exmoor is about ‘riding up hills in order to ride down them’. People who do this choose the compromises between burly/climbing and efficient/fun that suits them – with the “winner” being (s)he with the biggest grin, even if five minutes slower!