Additionally, the increase in rotational weight challenges many lower watt producing riders, so the performance gains are negated when the rider cannot accelerate the wheel system as quickly.
BS
Difference in size 26 to 29 is ~10%. Given a rim/tyre/sealant weight of 1kg per wheel (light, but a bit heavier than what I have for 26) then that’s 200g extra in total. For a system weight for light rider of 70kg (60kg rider, 10kg bike) and given weight at the edge of the wheel counts double for acceleration, that will make a 0.6% difference to acceleration.
Anybody who reckons they can detect a 0.6% difference in acceleration needs to get themselves tested for exceptional ability, as you’re way off the scale. Given you spend lots of your time rolling (where there’s far more than 0.6% advantage to 29 over 26) than accelerating, it’s clear where the advantage lies.
All the above holds true for a comparison between 27.5 and 29, except the differences are a bit smaller.
The solution for many riders is 27,5”. The new wheelsize standard combines the best of both worlds, is somewhere between 29” and 26” in terms of advantages and disadvantages, but near enough 26″ that it’s hard to tell the difference
So it’s your fault Scott and Giant you short arsed, low watters! are just a good excuse for the marketing men
