Forum menu
One of each size limits you to three. Or one bike and a unicycle.
When I was pondering this question I found this article really useful:
https://www.bike198.com/26-vs-29-mountain-bike-debate/
The summary, 'ideal' wheel size by trail type:
- Tight and twisty: 26″ and 650B
- Open and rocky: 650B and 29er
- Racing and FSR [forest service road]: 29er
And ideal wheel size by bike type (if you are quite tall as is the guy writing the article):
Singlespeed and Hard Tails: 29er
Short Travel Race Bikes (100mm and under): 29er
Trail bike (140mm and 150mm): 650B
160m+: 27.5″
And in the 5 years since that was written the rule book is shredded, 29r dh winners 650b as race winners, ews going on both...
That sounds like an awful lot more air resistance on the 29er , are you sure that you haven’t made a mistake .
Working on the basis that air resistance is roughly proportional to the square of velocity, 72km/h gives about 40% more drag than 61km/h. All quite approximate and I'm not guaranteeing absence of mistakes 🙂
True, but there are always exception and they still seem reasonable guidelines.
It's always easier for me anyway, as my downhill days are over and my rigid days here to stay; the combination of rigid bikes and 29er wheels is probably the least broken rule on that list. Until you get to 27plus. And the weird 79er I just built myself, come to think of it...
Working on the basis that air resistance is roughly proportional to the square of velocity, 72km/h gives about 40% more drag than 61km/h. All quite approximate and I’m not guaranteeing absence of mistakes
Sorry , ignore me , I didn't read your initial post properly , I thought that you were claiming that a 29er had 40% more wind resistance than a 26" at the same speed
True, but there are always exception and they still seem reasonable guidelines.
Possibly second hand but there are a whole generation of bikes that blow that out of the water.
@Bez, Doubt all you want, I'm just saying what I see repeatedly on my GPS post ride. And judging by how much my eyes water, the 29er feels faster.
I'm not doubting your speeds, I'm just saying you won't get a difference on that scale simply by using a 10% larger wheel: there will be other, more significant factors at play.
The main difference is you can buy spares for the 29er
the reality is the 29er will shit all over the 26er in every single department.
@Bez, Any ideas on what? It's something I am curious about. Both hope wheels, small block 8s on both bikes, Ritchey P29er vs Dialled bikes Love/hate. Both hope brakes with no discernible drag. I spin out in the top quarter of the hill then tuck in as best as I can.
OP I switch between the two bikes you describe, but heavier, several times a week, there's a really big difference between them. The 26 is a hoot, accelerates a heck of a lot quicker, turns much more naturally and easily and is way easier for wheelies, lame manuals and general mucking about. Compared to the 29er it feels almost nervous but if you embrace it and like to goon around, it's much more fun.
The 29er is the better and faster bike off road, big wheels roll more nicely through roots and chop and a light 29er hardtail is just a treat. The down side is heavier wheels accelerate more slowly (but also help hold speed) and turning is less exciting and more involved. From your weights I'm assuming they're xc bikes rather than trail orientated in which case I'd go 29 all day for sure. Also I'm not sure how easy it's going to be to get spare 26 parts going forwards.
I always think a 29er is like wearing a rubber, you can go faster and harder for longer, and stray into more dangerous territory 😉 , but at the end of the day there's just a bit less feeling and excitement.
Any ideas on what? It’s something I am curious about. Both hope wheels, small block 8s on both bikes, Ritchey P29er vs Dialled bikes Love/hate. Both hope brakes with no discernible drag. I spin out in the top quarter of the hill then tuck in as best as I can.
won't it just be the gearing? if you are spinning out on the hill before freewheeling then you are starting at different speeds
After resisting for years I replaced both my 26 inch MTBs with 29ers this year. First was the hardtail, as soon as I was one long ride in, I knew I wasn't going to ride a 26 in any volume again.
Lots of the reasons are mentioned above but for me, being 6'3", the geometry and general fit and way the bike rides is better on a greater proportion of terrain, a greater proportion of the tine. Not all situations though. 26inch definitely faster to accelerate and more flickable, but in all other areas, as above, not as good.
I ride a mix from local woodsy and technical singletrack to rocky lakes and peaks. No serious dh uplifts etc. though.
Not wanting to hijack the thread, but I'm in a position where this topic is very interesting to me as I currently ride a 26er hardtail and I'm considering a new 29er full sus...
So my question is 'What about 27.5?'... isn't it meant to be be the best of both worlds??
So my question is ‘What about 27.5?’… isn’t it meant to be be the best of both worlds??
Go ride some, just do it, all bikes are different 😉 They are different for different reasons, good bikes are good bikes.
@mikewsmith... I hear you! But unfortunately some of us out there have to buy pretty much blind. Which is why these forums are great. But it does allow people to get a but obsessed with the details.
If anyone could provide a general overview of the differences with the wheel sizes that would be really useful.
Aw... you know what? Don't worry about it... I'm going 29er.
I'll enjoy it no matter what.
If anyone could provide a general overview of the differences with the wheel sizes that would be really useful.
Well it's all been done up there, lots of stuff about acceleration and handling but they are nothing without a good frame under them, stuff is changing a lot at the moment, long travel 29r are making waves, solid 650b bikes are too, plenty of feedback on bikes out there but for me the wheels make a small part of the bike, important but only as part of the package.
So my question is ‘What about 27.5?’… isn’t it meant to be be the best of both worlds??
No, it's a halfway house.
Bigger wheels roll better but are heavier and in theory less manoeuvrable. So the bigger you go the better they roll. The smaller you go the faster they accelerate. Geometry can offset the manoeuvrability thing.
Depends what riding you do I'd say. 29er would be my default, only get 27.5 if you know you want it.
@mike @mol...
Wise words from both.
Decision made.
Thanks all for the help... I'll report back in when I finally make the purchase!
halfway house for one rider, best of both worlds for another
I swap between a 29er hardtail and a 26er hardtail, both xc-ish with 100mm fork. 29er is slightly slacker.
29er has more wheel out front - makes it harder to go over the handlebars. But so does a small-wheeled bike with a long fork and slack head angle, I guess.
My 26er feels very sketchy when pointed down steep stuff in comparison, but it's not very slack.
I sometimes struggle when I get into a narrow rut on the 29er, very easy for the wheel to touch the edge of the rut and tries to climb out, even if i'm trying to carry on forwards.
Once you are used to the look of a 29er, long, slack bikes with small wheels look weird.
Better tyre choice for a 29er these days (compared to 26).
Some of my PR's on the local trail are on the 26er, some on the 29er. 29er feels more comfortable and confidence inspiring, especially in the rocky, rooty stuff.
I'd definitely keep the 29er out of the two.
Theoretically it is a bit more difficult to go over the front on a bigger wheeled bike on account of the path your arse must take to go over the front having a higher high point and a steeper initial trajectory because of the higher front hub. But I suspect some of the perceived reduction in over-the-frontness comes from the extra rollability.