Forum menu
A genuine question I have in regard to this mostly prompted by investigating if my blur could run 650b wheels at some future date.
I have continental rubber queen tyres so big volume, high sidewalls etc etc. In the 2.2 size they come up large 2.4 won't fit my forks as too high as opposed to too wide. Just thinking that in real terms if you run high volume 26 tyres you're most of the way to 27.5 or am I mad, an inch and a half seems like nothing and poss mitigated by tyre choice?
It's not even an inch and a half. real world reports are coming out with differences of 7-11mm between 650b and 26" (w/proper tyres on).
I don't think both can survive, so will stay with 26" until there's a winner.
Go to MTBR, they have many instances of 650b-ing bikes, and I know some TRcs have been done with some success but at the cost of mud clearance.
No, you're not mad. 26" wheels are 559mm diameter. 27.5"/650b wheels are 584mm diameter. That's a 25mm difference, fractionally less than 1".
The overall diameter of a 26" wheel with a big but not huge tyre (like a RQ 2.2) is about the same as that of a 650b wheel with a skinny XC race or mud tyre.
Thanks I thought it might be. I'm sure a 650b with the same tyre as it's 26inchcousin would be bigger but it does seem a bit of a "what's the point"? type of innovation.
Thanks I thought it might be. I'm sure a 650b with the same tyre as it's 26inchcousin would be bigger but it does seem a bit of a "what's the point"? type of innovation.
+1
650b is too similar to 26" to make it a worthwhile upgrade or addition to the shed. However, 26" and 29" are different enough to both have their place in my opinion.