Forum menu
Everyone says that 29ers roll faster, but to be honest the main determinant of how fast I go off road is my nerve. If the bike rolled faster I'd just have to brake more. Like martinxyz I find the ability to go slowly more important and the two 29ers that I've tried seemed worse in that regard. I also found that I got more tired on a 4 hour natural trail ride in the Scottish highlands on a 28er hardtail than on my (supposedly less efficient) Five. May have been nothing to do with the wheel size, but it was a bit of a surprise. Still wouldn't rule one out if I were in the market for a new bike though. Just test whatever you fancy and buy whichever one you like best.
Cheers
Andy
Are people genuinely 'resistant to change' or just that they don't currently need a new bike yet?
All the people I ride with have said that when they replace their bike they will probably test ride a 29er too. There is no talk of 'resistance', it's just that we don't need new bikes.
I bought a new full sus in 2010 & shortly after that I bought a hardtail frame to build up. So I now have 2 perfectly good bikes. I can't afford to just go out & replace them with 29ers because everyone is telling me they are better.
It seems that a lot of the time it is the pro 29 wheel people who are desperate to convince people that everyone should swap over to 29" wheels, rather than people on 26" wheels being particularly resistant.
If I keep my 26" wheeled bikes, I am not some kind of clandestine resistance group. I just don't have a desire to spank a lot of cash on 2 new bikes when the ones I have are perfectly good.
But, I still have a CRT telly because it still works.....
Martinxyz - I'd expect a smaller wheel to go round a pump track or bmx track fastest, it should accelerate faster and a shorter wheelbase of an average 26" bike works the transitions better, but in a roll-down test on rougher ground a bigger wheel picks up speed faster ie has less rolling resistance (if tyres and pressure are equal).
Makes sod all difference overall in mixed riding conditions to many of us, but it's where the much-touted '29er advantages #1 - faster rolling' comes from. It's not an energy-creation device though )
Also interesting to note that suspension makes a difference - even on rough terrain a 26" bike with good full suspension should be faster than a rigid or hard tail 29" bike.
I am just exploring why folk resist Vs early adopters
Resistance implies we're all going to end up on them eventually. I hope not.
Now me, I'd no more decide that my next bike must have a certain size of wheel than I'd decide it must have a certain size of rotor, or a certain number of gears. I'd buy the whole bike, not some wheels with a bike coincidentally attached.
Is this still running? (Good thread then I guess CTBM)...
Clearly a topic that people are interested in discussing (or ranting about)...
More of my thoughts:
The rolling resistance debate;
A 29er has two (connected) advantages to my mind, it holds speed better over rough terrain by rolling better; this means the rider is expending less energy in maintaining ground speed, hence a less fatigued rider is a "better perfoming" one...
The fact that a 29" wheel rolls better in not really debatable, the degree to which that is of benefit to any given rider is IMO...
The question is of course do the benefits balance with the compromises? Some find it does others don't.
Sadly some see it more as an "ideological" thing that has almost nothing to do with simply judging benefits/compromises of what is really just a piece of sporting equipment TBH.
It's a bit like a runner projecting all their least favoured character traits onto someone just because they use Nike shoes rather than Asics...
I guess the term "Resistance to adoption" suggested that enevitably we will all be using 29" wheels, but surely it depends on what they do well and what they don't?
I'll admit I'm not fully up to speed with XC racing, are people still podiuming on 26ers? or is that particular arms race over? what about Enduro? or for that matter gravity enduro, I know I've not yet seen a 29er on a DH track, but I've heard of such bikes existing...
I think it will eventually shake out that some MTB applications end up defaulting to 29" wheels, XC racing, perhaps Enduro/endurance racing, and Single speed riding/racing (where making the most of one that gear matters) would have the clearest benefits, While sticking to 26" for DH, 4X and gravity enduro makes sense to my mind.
The route for more widespread adoption of 29ers would be through "Trail Bikes" that is to say the sort of bikes that most riders just go out and ride (not race) on, trail centres, local woods the type of riding that the greater majority of riders probably engage in these days to a certain extent, that rather broad application requires a balance of technical handling and fatigue limiting efficiency for longer rides that a 29" wheel may provide, but then again a 26" wheel may already do the job perfectly well...
If 29ers capture the trail bike market, then I think they will become the general "norm" for MTBs... as it is I think they still have the flat backed XC snake and Beardy SSer image in a lot of minds and that could still hinder their adoption...
I also found that I got more tired on a 4 hour natural trail ride in the Scottish highlands on a 29er hardtail than on my (supposedly less efficient) Five.
A fair comparison... I think not 😉
Maybe try an Orange Gyro or Santa Cruz Tallboy on the same ride, then see how you get on.
It seems that a lot of the time it is the pro 29 wheel people who are desperate to convince people that everyone should swap over to 29" wheels, rather than people on 26" wheels being particularly resistant.
Not sure who you ride with but the guys from the various groups I ride with are all just pro-bikes regardless of wheel size. We have some light hearted banter about 'clown wheels' etc but no more than banter about tyre choice, dropper posts, lycra etc etc. You make your choices and go ride as far as we're concerned. What we buy or don't buy in the next few years will ultimately dictate the direction the wheel-size standards go in the future.
Am I the first on this thread to wonder who gives a crap anyway?
Interestingly, I think there's still only one of the '29er evangelists' who has answered the question about 650b.
So how many early adopters of 29" will try out 650B?
Or will they say 'I don't see the point, I like my 29"', echoing many 26" rider's (perfectly legitimate) feelings now?
I was converted back in 2008 to 29ers, SSer's they just fitted the environment I ride and ridden and continue to do so. I have just sold my 26er it having been sat in my spare room for 2 years unused.
But then I'm a roadie with mtb blood, so the 29er fits my expectations of what I want from a bike.
It's simple really- 29r is a cyclecross bike and a 26r is a mountain bike! 8)
The recent Singletrack Magazine test of the Cotic Rocket, Nukeproof Maga & Orange Gyro pretty much perfectly sums up where the sport currently stands for me, i.e. technology and bike design have really come on in recent years and there's a wide choice of fantastic bikes available for UK trail riding. Some of them happen to have different wheel sizes... and some are also made of different frame materials, and have different geometry, suspension etc. 😉
Nobody is being forced to buy a new bike, and bikes of a certain wheel size are not becoming obsolete just because alternatives are available. Just get out and ride 😀
Interestingly, I think there's still only one of the '29er evangelists' who has answered the question about 650b.
It's simple really- 29r is a cyclecross bike and a 26r is a mountain bike!
Oh dear. You guys seriously need to just get out more and stop worrying about this stuff.
Choice is good.
I tried a Santa Cruz 29er, great bike, bit too grown up for me I'll stick to 26, thanks.
Riding is good, riding is good, riding is good, what you ride is up to you. Though I may extract the urine once in a while just for the hell of it. 😈
Interestingly, I think there's still only one of the '29er evangelists' who has answered the question about 650b.
Caveat: [b]I have not ridden a 650b[/b] and I have only done a few rides on my 29 (tho enough to stick with it and be a convert).
But here goes: my understanding is a 650b is closer in size (about 40%) to a 26 than it is to a 29 (about 60%). It's defo not '27.5' in the sense that saying 27.5 implies it's an exact mid-point. Since I'm not seeing any downsides, and I do feel the advantages, to the 29 over 26 for the riding I'm doing, I'd think I'd chose 29 over 650b but 650b over 26, if I was forced to choose.
This http://www.mbaction.com/Main/News/Shootout_Wheel_Wars_29_vs_275_vs_26_5159.aspx did a side-by-side on 3 similar bikes and came out for 27.5.
I do think that 27.5 Jamis looks nice!
You pays yer money you takes yer choice.
The recent Singletrack Magazine test of the Cotic Rocket, Nukeproof Maga & Orange Gyro pretty much perfectly sums up where the sport currently stands for me, i.e. technology and bike design have really come on in recent years and there's a wide choice of fantastic bikes available for UK trail riding.
Oh dear. You guys seriously need to just get out more and stop worrying about this stuff.
LOL... is it really only about wheel size for you Grum 😐
Interestingly, I think there's still only one of the '29er evangelists' who has answered the question about 650b.
If the bikes looks nice I personally wouldn't rule it out, but 29" works for me, the XL frames look normal. so why go backwards.
Hey CTBM - I have loved SSUKs, SSWCs and SSECs what makes these events fun are amongst other things the wheel sizes (given we are all mincing, pushing and drinking our way round the woods).
I do think I remember you doing Belgium on a Cross bike? Chapeaux!
There's rigid / suspension / there's the odd full suss - and we have seen 26ers win in mixed fields of 26 and 29ers (Wales 2010 and Sweden 2006 spring to mind). I have even seen 650bs beating the other two as well as all that crazy 69er business.....
So I agree with you - in that it's all good. And to say that when the 'niche people' get together there isn't really a niche when it comes to wheels, kind of cuts through the subject for me. Do as you please - and enjoy what everyone else does!
Change the subject - is there momentum for your mooted SSUK13 randonez format by the sea? Me (29er) the wife (26er) and our baby (OO) do hope so!
LOL... is it really only about wheel size for you Grum
Nah I really care very little, I just find evangelists of any sort fairly tedious - I'm just waiting for a DVD to burn for work then I'm off out. 🙂
OK So, lots of people ride 29er and find it better - especially the taller amongst us. I think we can agree on that?
29ers are being heavily marketed with various claims by the manufacturers that they 'wheel-out' (ho ho) with every new product. I think we can agree on that?
I think there are three types of people who buy any product. 1 - People who generally find it better. 2 - People who've been sold on the marketing and 3. People who don't want to feel left behind by the trends.
So, if enough people find them good, and enough people are persuaded by the marketing, the 29" domination becomes self-fulfilling. And before anyone mentions supply and demand - it's the job of marketing to create new demand where there was none before.
Personally, I don't care what bike you ride. I'm short and find 29ers unwieldy and even ungainly. I moved from BMX to MTB and had to adapt, took me a while to regain bunny hop height etc. I tried a Spesh 29er at the cycle show, as well as a 26" Kinesis and a couple of 26" Pivots. The Spesh felt dreadful - didn't help that they hadn't bothered putting decent pedals on it. I can jump and flick my road bike even - mainly because it doesn't have wheels/rubber the size and weight of mill stones. No doubt they'll make a 29 bike I can jump and flick with ease one day - but it will cost 5K and still look like I'm a kid on my dad's bike.
Anyway, my point here is that I'm sticking with 26" out of preference. My concern, and that of many I assume, is that companies like Specialized will stop making 26" altogether and others will follow suit. So I'll be a dying breed finding it hard to find parts and being laughed at at trail centres on my 'kid's bike' 😆
People can laugh at me all they want - but I'll need the parts! So, I think the reaction you're experiencing if defensiveness, IMHO.
[quote=starfanglednutter ]
Anyway, my point here is that I'm sticking with 26" out of preference. My concern, and that of many I assume, is that companies like Specialized will stop making 26" altogether and others will follow suit. So I'll be a dying breed finding it hard to find parts and being laughed at at trail centres on my 'kid's bike'
I think 26ers will still be found at trail centres, where their characteristics are an advantage, just not so much elsewhere. As I've already said in this thread, i think you [i]will[/i] find parts harder to come by but given how much "old" technology is still around, I don't think they'll disappear altogether.
I finally saw some 29ers for the first time on Saturday night when I went to a race! (I did awfully, I was all over the place and kept hitting invisible things that threw me around - eyes getting bad). They do look funny. As someone says above, I just don't normally ever see them. Interesting though, people race with them, but I will be firnly sticking to 26".
People keep referring to the difference between 29ers and 26ers.
If it's so obvious, please can someone quantify it?
I'm currently thinking that the cycling placebo effect is in full flow, and I'd like to know if I'm misguided.
29" wheels make lifting the front end harder, so really depends what you want out of a bike. I personally would see no benefit going 29 only disadvantages.
I want to buy a 24" to better my skills on a mountain bike.
Anyhow 29" are heavier rims, tubes, tyres, rotational weight etc.
I've got a rigid 29er, although don't score too highly on the STW niche-o-meter as its got gears.
It was eye-opening as to how much better to ride it was than my old 26" bike.
Then the new-bike-itis wore off.
🙁
It is different, my 29er feels a bit taller, and does roll over some things better, but on a normal, reasonably mixed off-road ride I don't think there's that much difference. Maybe if you were riding a DH track repeatedly or on some very specific terrain you'd really have a preference. Like needing a fatbike for sand dunes or something.
Tyre pressure and how knackered you feel is probably more noticeable TBH.
I'd probably buy a 29er next time, mostly so I only have to have one lot of innertubes, but not because it's loads better.
It is different, my 29er feels a bit taller
Strange, the bottom bracket is lower in relation to the hubs on almost all 29ers.
the whole rolling resistance thing seems to be widely misunderstood...
My take on it is that a larger wheel rolls better 'over obstacles' due to reduced angle of attack and relative size of wheel versus obstacle.
But I dont think there is less rolling resistance, if anything the opposite might be true. The longer contact patch of a larger wheel (at the same pressure) means more casing deformation than a smaller wheel (wider and shorter contact patch) and thus more rolling resistance than the smaller wheel.
The longer contact patch is also what gives the increased lateral grip as the contact patch is elongated, but not actually any bigger (pressure being equal remember).
Anyway, I'm still researching and thinking about the math at the moment...
In the real world it comes down to where you ride and over what, and the tyre you're running as to which factor has the biggest influence.
Strange, the bottom bracket is lower in relation to the hubs on almost all 29ers.
Sorry, I meant the front end feels taller.
Which I appreciate I could remedy with some flat bars and a lower stem, so is entirely due to my laziness as opposed to some part of 29er v 26er geometry.
But rolling resistance is a function of carcass deformation; bigger carcass, less deformation.
Anyway, can anyone quantify the differences, or is this new bike effect?
But rolling resistance is a function of carcass deformation; bigger carcass, less deformation
But if you think about he deformation at the contact patch (which is where it counts in this case) is it still not more due to the extra length?
Think about the 'roundness' of the wheel for want of a better term, at the same pressure, with tyres of the same width the contact patch of the 26er and the 29er are the same area, but the 26er is wider and the 29er longer, meaning the 29er wheel is 'less round'
In rolling forwards the deformation of the carcass acts over the length of the contact patch, meaning the carcass has to deform less on the smaller wheel as it moves round the tyre as it rotates.
ie: you're 'flattening' the wheel less on the 26er.
The difference may be so small than it is overcome by the other factors like the increased diameter. I just brought it up due to the 'they roll better' phrase always being used but people also complaining of 29er wheels feeling draggier at times.
on another note, funny how we've had people in this thread saying '26ers will stay for places like trail centres', but other people saying '29ers are better at trail centres' just goes to show it's probably more about where and how *you* ride than the wheels you're doing it on.
The theory seems all very well, but surely it comes down to testing? I demo-ed 6 bikes on the same trail, one after the other. The 26/29 split was 50/50 and were rode singletrack of differing degrees of steepness, the odd jump, some fast sections, and some rooty and some gnarly sections. For me one set stood out as being much better than the other - and isn't that all that matters?
Larger wheels, in fact larger tyres on the same wheel have less RR than smaller ones. I think you are mistaken.
grum - MemberInterestingly, I think there's still only one of the '29er evangelists' who has answered the question about 650b.
I don't think you've heard any evangelising from me.
It does strike me as a little odd how you always pop up on these threads even though you have no intention of owning a 29er.
Or so you say. 😆
I think you're protesting a little too much. 😉
Anyway, can anyone quantify the difference between 26 and 29ers?
can anyone quantify the difference
Yes it's 3. 🙂
Larger wheels, in fact larger tyres on the same wheel have less RR than smaller ones. I think you are mistaken.
That exactly what I mean, going on the understanding that a larger tyre on the same wheel does have less RR, and a wider contact patch, and less carcass deformation than it's smaller, longer patched cousin, how does that relate to the same size (width and height) tyre on a different diameter wheel?
Does the increased air volume mean that there is less deformation overall, or is it still mostly dominated by local deformation at the contact patch?
I may well be mistaken, hence the discussion, as I said it seems to be widely misunderstood as lots of people talking about about it without defining what they mean.
Anyway, can anyone quantify the differences, or is this new bike effect?
In my case, it was new bike syndrome.
Who here can wheelie a 29" ?
on roughly the same theme then, Trials riders....
back in the good old days you had 20inch trial bikes and 26inch trials bikes.
Now a lot of people use 24 inch, especially for street, are they little wheelers migrating up, or big wheelers migrating down?
Do they get the same levels of scorn from both sides?
Well I can wheelie a road bike and a cross bike, but I suspect that opens a whole new can of worms.
I would genuinely be interested in a scientific appreciation of the change in wheel size and the effect that it has, and the real world effect if that is different.
So far people seem to be saying that 29ers are betterer but without any kind of back up, is there any?
Charlie posted up an interesting graph thing that showed the different angles that different sized wheels aproached square edge bumps at.
I too can wheelie most things.
It's the sign of a misspent youth. 🙂
[i]Charlie posted up an interesting graph thing that showed the different angles that different sized wheels aproached square edge bumps at.[/i]
Is that not intimately dependent on the size of said bumps?
Charlie posted up an interesting graph thing that showed the different angles that different sized wheels aproached square edge bumps at.
Sounds fascinating, does he do kids parties?