Would you rather XC race on a 22lb FS 26er with 80mm travel, or a 26lb Steel HT 29er with 100mm forks?

Which course?

Neither.

Course does apply, as does length of race, amount / type of hills and erm, what bike you like better

All courses…. If you personally had to choose.

I wouldn’t choose based on preference of bike. I would mock-up an xc loop in my local woods and do some back-to-back timed laps, then pick the fastest.

I think the simple answer is

“whatever you currently own”

Until you get to the sharp end of the pack it will make VERY little difference to your finishing position. If you’re 30th, you’re maybe 28th… or 32nd… it’s not going to turn someone from a mid-pack to a front end either way.

Whatever you have and are most comfortable pedalling/riding.

Probably the FS, assuming it’s a good one. I remember demoing a 26″ anthem-x when they first appeared and thinking it was an absolute rocketship!

In reality though, I’d probably buy/keep the steel 29er, I’ve had steel HT’s one in one form or another for the last 10 years, last 5 of those have been variations on 29ers with/without suspension forks. And they’ve always been by most used bike. So I suspect I’d be more inclined to take it out of the shed just for a ride (which means more riding, more fitness, and moar faster).

Errm, you haven’t said what colour they are? Everything else pales into insignificance

“whatever you currently own”

I already own the FS. My thoughts were that I could maybe sell it and with the proceeds by second hand suspension forks and lighter wheels for the 29er. I’m considering it because I did do my local loop on the 26er recently and it took me three goes to even complete the rocky Strava segment I’m focusing on for training, never mind do it faster than the 29er.

29er is metallic cherry red, 26er is clearcoated raw, to save weight…

So assuming I can sell the FS for enough, it should be a cost neutral switch.

Stick with a rigid fork and pay a coach (of the fitness variety not the gnarcore schalping type), it’ll probably make you faster than a bit of bounce.

Likewise sell the gears, go singlespeed, stop buying razors etc.

Stick with a rigid fork and pay a coach (of the fitness variety not the gnarcore schalping type), it’ll probably make you faster than a bit of bounce.

No chance. Rigid costs me way too much time on descents. And before I get a lecture on skills I was riding down all sorts on a rigid 26er when you were in Primary school 🙂 For that matter I was paying coaches when you were a student too.

I think you know the answer. And it’s red too.

I did do my local loop on the 26er recently and it took me three goes to even complete the rocky Strava segment I’m focusing on for training, never mind do it faster than the 29er.

There’s your answer.

Who wants to buy a bling XC race bike from 2007 for £500?

After going from 26, to 29er short FS, I’m now on Carbon 100MM HT (or will be when it arrives.

For 90 min XCO the 29er HT is the most reliable, lightest option. I’ll be using my 29er FS for 12/24 hrs and social trails riding. Here in the SE where its less technical 29er is fastest – although the margins are as above ^^.

The thing that changed my mind was 1xDNF, 2x loss of places due to clogging of the rear linkages, and 2 x chain forced off by the very same clogged mud pushing outward onto the chainring. Also the modern XC race Geo is better handling than my older Anthem based one.

I also have Ti 26 HT will will get used from time to time. probably with the kids / winter option.

I think there’s no 26 disadvantage when it’s non technical. The issue is when it gets rocky. However I think most courses aren’t that rocky.

The thing that changed my mind was 1xDNF, 2x loss of places due to clogging of the rear linkages, and 2 x chain forced off by the very same clogged mud pushing outward onto the chainring.

Interesting.. my FS is a superb bike in all respects including mud clearance.. it’s just 26 which I never thought was an issue until I failed to do this climb.

I think there’s no 26 disadvantage when it’s non technical. The issue is when it gets rocky. However I think most courses aren’t that rocky.

Anecdotally I’d disagree. My local trails aren’t technical to a half competent rider, but my times went down noticeably switching from a very nice 26″ HT to a very nice 29″ HT. Versus full suss it was less clear, as I used to be able to keep better form on the full suss over all sections, but in the end settled on hard tail again for more practical reasons (mud clearance and maintenance in my case).

I have a similar pair. I’m racing my 23.5lb steel HT tonight.

adsh – Member
I have a similar pair. I’m racing my 23.5lb steel HT tonight.

I must work out who you are – technicolour IIRC – and say hello. I’ll be on the Anthem, as the other one hasn’t turned up yet.

Molgrips I agree with adsh here. Even when you watch shurter’s video’s I haven’t seen his shock move yet, and assume he has it quite hard just there for the big hits.

My local trails aren’t technical to a half competent rider, but my times went down noticeably switching from a very nice 26″ HT to a very nice 29″ HT.

Hmm. What kind of terrain?

My loop has two steep tough climbs – one is rocky and loose, the other is steeper still, stony but firm. On the same ride I failed the rocky one I smashed my PB on the other by quite a bit.

However the steepness could be a factor given the 5lb weight difference. It’s too difficult to tell on the flats because it’s all gates and weather-dependent surfaces otherwise.

I’d try back to back it on my woods loop without gates but given that I only have a rigid fork on the 29er I’ll be way too slow on the descents to get a good idea.

Here’s something of interest:

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFH3Zn89R-s[/video]

I’ve still got those fox forks MG. You’d be welcome to borrow them to try if you like. If you decide to go in that direction you can make me an offer or give them back.

Hmm. What kind of terrain?

Think the bits off to the Marlborough side of the Ridgeway, or West Woods if you made it there from Swindon – steep chalky hill climbs, nice woodsy single track, rut of doom ridge rides. Flints like babys heads but in parts – not like a proper rocky ride.

I’m actually a bit SE of there but still in the North Wessex Downs. I don’t find suspension forks even a huge advantage in terms of speed but they win on comfort for life outside of segments.

Am I right in thinking you’re Cardiff based Molgrips? Do you race the welsh series? I don’t think there’s been a course I’ve raced in the Welsh series where I’d rather have had a full suss bike.

Interesting, brassneck.

Taxi25 – thanks for the offer.. Will have to think carefully as money is tight and I keep wasting it!

Ferrals – did not know there still was a welsh series. I’ve not felt quick enough to bother for a few years but I might give it a go if there are local races.

Yep still a series – clearly not advertised well enough though! Only 4 races this year and last year. The nearest to Cardiff is Builth but both in Builth have been this year. Last one this year is 31st July in Aberystwyth. Also UK marathon champs in Llandovery in Aug. Don’t think I’ll do that as haven’t ridden more than 50km in ages, might do the half marathon though.

Having said that about Wales, last time I looked many of the races were further from me than Gorricks!

So assuming I can sell the FS for enough, it should be a cost neutral switch.

you may as well keep it tbh, a 2007 26″ is practically worthless.

I though the general rule was big lads on FS. the weight penalty is lessened as the difference between rider and bike is reduced, and the extra power bigger lads produce overcome the extra power you need to put out to keep the FS moving fast.

Bah!

29er, Steel Singlespeed Rigid, love it. About to do 50km XC race this weekend.

I have a similar pair. I’m racing my 23.5lb steel HT tonight

I might have done better on the FS – surprisingly hard to pedal at times on the dried ruts of Beastway

technicolour IIRC

You did remember correctly though technicolour is being kind – it didn’t use to look so bad until my LBS sponsored* me.

*As in gave me a free jersey.

I might have done better on the FS – surprisingly hard to pedal at times on the dried ruts of Beastway

I noticed it was much easier over those on the Anthem when following riders last night. luckily I haven’t just ordered an HT. Oh, wait… 😕

Reading into some of this though, personally speaking although not Big I’m a “low power” rider with a weird propensity to be able to push big gears on flats for speed when others don’t / can’t, so I think the pain of that might lead to a gain on the climbs flats and sprints for me.

I think there’s no 26 disadvantage when it’s non technical. The issue is when it gets rocky. However I think most courses aren’t that rocky.

TBH, the only place i’d prefer a 26″ would be on tight (really tight) technical climbs. Everywhere else a bigger wheel will roll over more and roll faster. Non-technical, Rocky, Technical, downhill, fireroads and so on.

And experience tells me that courses got less rocky in the early/mid-noughties and since have been getting progressively rockier since about 08-09.
It’s not all rocky though, they just seem to be fireroad/rocks/singletrack/rocks rather than rocks/rocks/rocks which it used to be. (obviously not all courses, just the hard/fun ones)

FWIW theres a course near us where the organiser/landowner spent a couple of weeks dragging rocks from a small quarry on his land to insert/bury/stack onto a couple of 300+m sections of trail that are used in the race. Just to make it rockier.

We already had to race across the bottom of the quarry. 😕

Depends on where you ride I suppose. Most of my racing in the past was in the Gorrick area, which is pretty rock-free mostly.

This particular climb though is too tricky for an XC race I would expect. Enough people would tab to cause a right old bottleneck on the first lap.

Its a funny one, when you look at WC courses the climbs are often very technical, including steep rock slabs etc, yet despite all the chat about ‘we need courses in the UK to become more technical’, I’ve yet to come accross a properly technical climb in a UK race.

The problem with really tough technical climbs that are seen on some of the WC XC courses is that sometimes you need the power output of a WC level rider to clear them – not something your average joe racing sport in regional races possesses.

I don’t think I’d want a technical climb, as they’d cause bottlenecks. The course as a whole should be a fitness challenge, with significant benefits awarded to those who can ride tech fast, but it can’t cause a traffic jam when 50% or even 20% of riders stall and have to get off. If it’s difficult it has to be wide enough for pushers and riders.

There are almost always bottlenecks IMO, but in general i agree with your definition (excluding the wide bit). Thing is courses are getting more technical on the descending front but not on the climbing front.

But techincal climbs are hard, technical descents are fun………. 😉

Go and become an enduro racer then! 😉 😆

Yes, but that’s frustrating for those of us who are quicker on the downs. They tend to make nice wide climbs so that the whippets can pour past me, then the singletrack is dead tight so I have to wait for ages as they trundle on…!

I have a feeling that the 26er will now give me even better acceleration advantage than I had 9 years ago, so maybe it’ll help 🙂