chip – Member

Please tell me you asked the chap to stand if not already, before taking a firm grip on his waistband as you proceeded to pour his coffee into the front of his shorts whilst uttering you sir are a fool.

If you did that to everyone who said some damn fool thing in glentress cafe, you’d never stop (and tbh I’d have to do it to myself a couple of times too)

buzz-lightyear – Member

That makes no sense to me at all. Frame size is selected primarily for leg-length and reach. What has wheel size got to do with that?

Big wheels look silly in most small frames. Most people buy bikes they like the look or idea of. I’d have considered a medium Stumpy Evo 29er if it wasn’t so disgusting to look at.

There’s probably some more practical considerations- 29ers are harder to package small, and heavier for equivalent spec, you might even run into toe overlap on shorter frames which is just awful on an mtb. But I bet you a shiny scottish Salmondollar that it’s really all about looks.

I agree with your example. 6′ 6″ is

at the far ends of the height bell-curve

though. I’m 6′ and would happily ride 26″ and 29″ for different things. So could most riders above 5’3″ or so.

So weight and CoG will have way more affect than angle of attack / wheel characteristics.

It has some influence, but a riders C of G moves about a lot. Partly what we’re both saying from different angles – how a rider interacts with the bike/wheels etc is what’s important, imo not the size of either. That’s when the ergonomics really are sorted.

Height is one part of weigh distribution, rider build is another. I know an occasional rider who’s shorter than me by maybe 5″, but his c of g will be the same if not higher – he’s built like a tank but he doesn’t have cyclist legs )

My point about proportional wheels was more with the idea that a brand makes ‘one model’ with 3 scaled wheels depending on frame size, or 2 wheels over 4 frames. OK, use a smaller wheel on a really tiny 29er maybe, but it’s not that straightforward. Change the wheels and you change what the bike is to some extent, if you’ve designed a character into a bike you change that when the wheels change, it’s like putting longer forks on etc.

This has to be one of my favourite threads, like EVA! 😆

^ poor choice Mr J. The 11th 650B thread was better. Or is it a 26″ thread? I dunno.

am i the only persson that thinks it makes perfect sense from a manufacturer point of view? We have had 26 in wheels for years. If your looking for a new bike you could get a really high top end second hand frame for the price of a new middle spec bike. Why would you spend more money on a lesser quality bike? Nowthen everyone agrees that 29ers are good but are different. Some people like them some dont but it still ment that you could go and get (as ive just done) a 26 in frame a year old that was 50% of the retail. You were happy with your bargin but the manufacturers less so.

Now they have obsoleted it over night effectively. Everyone saw the sales potential of 29ers but couldn’t get them to stick. Now there’s something thats effectively like the tapered headtube but its a new thing, you need it, your bike is rubbish without it etc etc. Only this time it means a large number of component changes so people are more wary.

We cant stop it. It will come along and reduce the value of our bikes and in a few years most of us i would expect will be riding them. for the meantime im happy with my “last of the breed” 26er.

jameso – to be clear, I’m not saying scaling wheels up through a range should be the only thing a designer should do.

But as Northwind said, small frames with 29ers look daft. I’d add that an XL frame with 26″ wheels also looks daft! So from an aesthetic point of view also, using a range af wheel size could be a good idea.

re preferences – I love my 29er, but not really much to do with it’s wheel size! And it’s super quick to change direction – not really fitting the industry clichés!

I think it rolls over stuff a bit better – technical loose climbs are most noticeable. But it’s the lightest bike I’ve had which will be making a big difference.

Yes but not the forks of my choice, but instead make do, or buy a replacement frame That would take tapered forks.

I have a 2010 5 also ,with 1-1/8 headtube, and started looking for the newer 26″ frame with tapered headtube,
But then thought better of it as I would not be surprised if the steerer standard changed again.
And decided instead to carry on with what I have and worry about when the time came, which is basically what you are saying.

I have no problem with other standards but the quick and deliberate killing off of recent standards just to force the market.

I was in the same situation with a 2009 5. I’d upgraded it over time but was starting to look at a dropper (the ones I like the look of are all 30.9mm +) and had realised if I wanted to change the fork I’d be limited with 1 1/8th so started to look about for a change. None of this was caused by 650b, it all happened before that but no one seemed so bothered at the time.

Couldn’t afford a brand new bike of choice so very nearly hit the button on a tapered 5 frame (26″). In the end got a very good deal on a complete and as new 5 29 so thought I’d have a look at a 29er.

I’ve got a steel HT frame that needs building up but has 1 1/8th steer tube so it’s becoming more difficult to find forks I fancy at the right price. I won’t be able to get a dropper I want for that.

Although I agree that the industry has been naughty with how they’re pushing 650b all of my problems were caused before 650b by the same people looking to make money. It’s how it is and how it’s always been and in the grand scale of things does not really matter.

Tyres and rims will continued to be made to a high standard while there’s a market for them. When there’s not a market they may dry up but the market at present, and well in to the future (unless everyone buys 650b) will still be there. These people want to make money. Why would they stop making parts that make them lots of it? No one has answered this through-out all the moaning.

spectabilis – Member

You can still get forks with a 1 1/8th if you look

26″ 2014 model year?

2 mins searching

You can google for two minutes and find a suspension fork no problem, look at an on line retailers entire range of forks and see how few are 26″ straight steerer, and the choice Is only getting smaller.

what Chip said .
the replies from the 26″ club seem a bit desperate or maybe muffled, maybe the heads are buried in the sand?

Lots of interesting (and conflicting) points made in this thread, without anyone being a dick about it… but then look who comes back.

Of course. I’m saying there’s no ergonomic or credible design reason to scale wheels to rider height within a bike model, not for the height range that most production bikes cover. Scale bars and frames and cranks, yes. And hat off to those making bikes small/large enough to really justify the wheels for ergonomics (Zinn, Terry). Demand for them is fairly small though (could be bigger but that’s another point)

If it’s done for looks, fair enough, products are sold on looks. But the marketing will dress it up with some height-chart stuff I’m sure..

There’s no-one I know of saying that their 29ers rides like a 26, not with any credibility. They may liken some traits to a 26, but it’s not the same or meant to mean ‘the same’. So imo it’s back to saying the wheels help tune a ride feel. That’s all, no one wheel is better than another and for the majority of riders wheel size is simply a choice. If you think the 26″ is the one for you then I do see why people are so pssd off at 650B. But a fair number of people have been happy riding both 29 or 650 or 4″ tyres when they were minor niches, there’s no reason to move to another size if you feel strongly enough about it.

edit to add

re preferences – I love my 29er, but not really much to do with it’s wheel size! And it’s super quick to change direction – not really fitting the industry clichés!

I could have written that about one of my bikes, it’s brilliant and the wheels are just a part of it.

I’m saying there’s no ergonomic or credible design reason to scale wheels to rider height within a bike model, not for the height range that most production bikes cover.

I can’t agree with that… if you want your weight balanced in the same way for different sized riders, then scaling up/down everything, including wheels, might make sense, no?

Because any one rider CAN ONLY BE ONE SIZE, you can never say from experience whether a small rider might find the handling of a XS 26 bike much the same as a larger rider finds the handling an XL 29 bike.

Even if you could scale the size of the rider up or down, to test your scaling idea you would also have to scale the trails and possibly gravity as well so it all gets a bit academic

So…. If you were all buying a new hardtail this year, would you opt for a 650B or a 26″ ?

or 29″ ?

Because any one rider CAN ONLY BE ONE SIZE, you can never say from experience whether a small rider might find the handling of a XS 26 bike much the same as a larger rider finds the handling an XL 29 bike.

Yes, true, if there was a defined feel we were all aiming at that enabled us to say ‘the same’? We’re fixed, but the fact a 26″ wheel has different physical characteristics to a 29 is also fixed so the differences based on how a rider may like a bike to feel are always there.
It does get a bit academic, but it’s interesting, sort of.

As far as roll-over goes, I’ve always thought that the wheels (or the trails) don’t give a stuff how tall you are – all they know how much momentum you’re carrying. But that’s also assuming to some extent the rider isn’t moving about as per the height example earlier. Less so, but getting to the point where the Germans would try to make a computer model of it all and I’d say f-it ride them and see how it feels : )

Considering the inane original post and the number of times the topic has been covered, how on earth has this thread got to 7 pages?!

P.s. I appreciate the irony that I’ve just added to it…

P.p.s Mods – stop this madness and lock the thread 🙂

holdsteady – Member

So…. If you were all buying a new hardtail this year, would you opt for a 650B or a 26″ ?

I’d get the bike I liked the most. 29er seems to make sense for hardtails but it wouldn’t be the deciding factor.

No the length of the thread is irrelevant – there has been a wheelsize thread running continuously for how long – three years?

There’s a lot of the same ground covered, but it does throw up some interesting stuff for me, the perceptions and why people ride what they do etc. Along with the bile.

rOcKeTdOg – Member
spectabilis – Member
You can still get forks with a 1 1/8th if you look
26″ 2014 model year?
2 mins searching

You can google for two minutes and find a suspension fork no problem, look at an on line retailers entire range of forks and see how few are 26″ straight steerer, and the choice Is only getting smaller.
what Chip said .
the replies from the 26″ club seem a bit desperate or maybe muffled, maybe the heads are buried in the sand?

Desperate? why would it matter to me?

So…. If you were all buying a new hardtail this year, would you opt for a 650B or a 26″ ?

bought a Privee Shan (26″). I’m very happy with it. I didn’t worry about spares of wheels tyres or forks.

Just an idea:
Work out how long you intend keeping your 26 and then stockpile your favourite tyres, maybe a favourite rim or two and if you’re really paranoid a pair of forks.
More realistically re. forks get them serviced regularly and you won’t have to lay out a load of dosh up front.
Usually – barring crashes – by the time forks are shagged the bike’s long in the tooth and spending 5 or 6 hundred quid on a new pair would perhaps be better spent towards a new bike as umpteen other ‘standards’ will have changed anyway.
If you’re just into running a classic sourcing hard to find parts goes with the territory.

FFS get on the bloody thing & ride it until it’s ****.

Have just ordered a stock of 26 Panaracer smokes and darts, plus some Mavic 531s, a Marco Pantani selle saddle and a second hand P-Bone fork just in case

Have just ordered a stock of 26 Panaracer smokes and darts, plus some Mavic 531s, a Marco Pantani selle saddle and a second hand P-Bone fork just in case

Damn! That’ll inflate the prices before I get my order in.
I really must keep my best ideas to myself!

if everyone with 26″ wheels will please move over to retrobike it will leave space to explore the 650c options here

An lbs tells it like it is re:wheelsize http://singletrackworld.com/2014/02/tuesday-treats-79-moose-cycles/

Desperate? why would it matter to me?

It seems to matter enough for you to ignore the facts

Mrs C just CHOSE a 26″ wheel over comparative options.

A) Because she’s a genius and B) It was right for her.

boosh

It seems to matter enough for you to ignore the facts

😀 you haven’t presented any….

Bloody hell. Is this crap still going?

The OP was the biggest trailing leg since Gareth Bale last ran into a penalty area and here you all are still flogging away at it.

At least the troll OP has had some fun………

spectabilis – Member
It seems to matter enough for you to ignore the facts
you haven’t presented any….

I’d direct you to read the whole thread again as lots of posters have done just that but it’s pointless as you’ll just continue to just read the parts you want to rather than the truth

I can’t hear you….

😆

Obviously not, no. Because:

a) the internet didn’t exist
b) high end wheels were still tubs, which just happened to be the same size as 700c, this dropping 27″ actually made a lot of sense in the way that introducing 650b doesn’t.

As far as roll-over goes, I’ve always thought that the wheels (or the trails) don’t give a stuff how tall you are – all they know how much momentum you’re carrying. But that’s also assuming to some extent the rider isn’t moving about as per the height example earlier. Less so, but getting to the point where the Germans would try to make a computer model of it all and I’d say f-it ride them and see how it feels : )

Your centre of gravity definitely matters with rollover, as does the movement of your arms and legs – the lower you are then the easier it is to keep weight off the front wheel. Big tyres definitely help too, giving the equivalent of a rearward axle path to reduce deceleration and thus the loading on the front wheel that causes the bike to decelerate more. That’s just based on me on smaller wheels – the big tyres climb over stuff way better than skinny tyres and when I’m standing tall rather than getting low the bike is much worse at rolling over the rough.

It’s an interesting conundrum this ‘new’ wheel size thing. It seems that a lot of new bike buyers are happy to buy a bike with 1″ larger wheels, either because they’ve bought into the marketing spin or because the industry’s sudden removal of 26″ has scared them about future support or a bit of both, hence the consumer is inadvertently driving the speed of change. Over on the MTBR Banshee forum it looks like those buying a whole new bike rather than just a frame and using their old parts are going with the slightly bigger wheels (they run either due to swappable dropouts).

If the average height of a MTBer was over 6′ so that most frames were M/L/XL rather than S/M/L I think 29ers would have become far far more popular – but there’s definitely a packaging issue with getting bars low enough, chainstays short enough, no toe overlap and enough mud clearance if you want longer suspension travel. I don’t think I know anyone shorter than 5’9 riding a suspended 29er although I ride amongst quite a lot of 29ers.

Lol @ Spectabilis 😆

pjbarton – Member
And it’s super quick to change direction – not really fitting the industry clichés!

You’re really on 650b aren’t you? You can tell us. We’re all friends here. 😉

I have adapted this quote from Skyfall to describe the process of what is going on in the bike industry, and this forum, with this wheel size crap:

“So how do you get rats to change wheel size, hmm? My grandmother showed me. We buried an oil drum, and hinged the lid. Then we wired 26″ wheels to the lid as bait. The rats come for the wheels, and… They fall into the drum, and after a month, you’ve trapped all the rats. But what did you do then? Throw the drum into the ocean? Burn it? No. You just leave it. And they begin to get hungry, then one by one… They start eating each other [on forum threads like this], until there are only two left. The two survivors. And then what – do you kill them? No. You take them, and release them into the trees. Only now, they don’t ride 26″ wheels anymore. Now they will only eat 650b.”

I’m not saying you’re all rats, but you get the idea…

Your centre of gravity definitely matters with rollover, as does the movement of your arms and legs

Certainly does and I should have said all that really matters is momentum and where the weight is, which is not so directly linked to height especially once you’re on the bike. I often don’t explain my thinking well when writing )

What you’re saying about getting low is right, or getting further back to do the same sort of thing. We’re not a rigid mass so the simple model of a higher c of g and the front axle tipping point doesn’t work as well for a dynamic rider on a bike. A taller rider has more room to move that weight around so we could say they’re more able to account for lower roll-over of small wheels (or geo/packaging of big wheels as you say), or they need the roll-over of big wheels if they’re less dynamic riders. It’s down to the individual as a rider rather than as a set of measurements.

chiefgrooveguru – Member

It’s an interesting conundrum this ‘new’ wheel size thing. It seems that a lot of new bike buyers are happy to buy a bike with 1″ larger wheels, either because they’ve bought into the marketing spin or because the industry’s sudden removal of 26″ has scared them about future support or a bit of both,

I’ve said this before but I think it’s mostly this complicated- 26 inch works really well but isn’t exactly interesting. 29ers introduced a curiosity and desire for change, and also work really well, but never overcame the fear of change as it seemed like quite a big step.

650b capitalises on all of these things- it satisfies the desire for novelty, while being such a small change that people are less afraid of it.

Course, the outcome is that the disruption/cost of the change is identical to 29ers but the result is far smaller but that’s probably not all that important to novelty-buyers and novelty-sellers. After all if you’ve already got a bike, you’re not buying a bike, you’re buying a change.

Me, I just bought a new front triangle for my 26 inch bike to keep it going but I think even for a misanthropic cynic like me, spending a lot on a 26 inch bike or frame now is probably not very smart. It’s not progress in my book but the game has changed. But the end result is, I’m refitting old bikes and making them last longer rather than buying a new bike. (I would have bought a new frame last month otherwise)

At the end of the day it’s a net-loss game IMO and they’re always stupid.

Me, I just bought a new front triangle for my 26 inch bike…

Considering you ride a hardtail, that’s impressive.