[Closed] 650b - WTF?

Getting us to spend money innit?
The bike industry has been telling us what we "need" for a long time now....

Yes it does but then do we need all those different bikes?
650 b makes a nice touring ride.

Wheel size doesn't really relate to your height, they just don't look as weird if it's on a large frame size. What 29er did you try? The manufacturer nominal sizing might not relate to what you're used to on a 26" but I'd be surprised if you're not a short-arse (which it doesn't sound like as you ride a medium 26") that you'd have any trouble finding a 29er that fitted.

650b isn't such a bad idea really, the problem is 29 got more widely adopted before. The key thing with 650b is it's easier to package the rear wheel into current 26" designs and still gives some of the benefits of a bigger wheel. If it had been adopted first I reckon 26" would disappear completely in a couple of years and then 29ers could just be niche. As it stands I can see 26 and 29 remaining mainstream for years with 650b niche, which is pointless (having 3 wheel sizes), especially given the 26"/650b overlap.

What does 650 'b' stand for is it metric, imperial? Rumour is Trek are maybe going to make a political gesture to stick it back to Specialised for their more 'successful' marketing of 29ers that seem to have gone down better in the States than they have here.

FuzzyWuzzy - Member
Wheel size doesn't really relate to your height, they just don't look as weird if it's on a large frame size. What 29er did you try?

I'm weird, I have 31" inside leg but have a short top bit so my legs dictate medium but the rest of me says small. I rode a medium Covert all last year, this year I switched to a small. The bike I was going to blag for this weekend just gone, was a 29er bandit, everyone round here is going on about what a cool ride it is, yet for me the stand over height was total ball contact, not even a centimetre clearance as was the case with the Covert medium, and it made my Small Covert look like a kids toy by comparison so they now tell me there is no small frame in a 29 Bandit (I haven't looked tbh).

Any someone I spoke to this morning on the blower, was kicking off about 650b's, which I'd never heard of, so hence this thread.

[img] http://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/users/2/photos/33276/s780_lars_double.jp g" target="_blank">http://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/users/2/photos/33276/s780_lars_double.jp g"/> ?1335075747[/img]

Found this picture on the sea otter thread of a 650b bike (the black KHS)which doesn't look that much different compared to that Double.

So what conceivable argument is there in favour of another wheel size?

What does 650 'b' stand for is it metric, imperial?

650b
700c
650a

all just French metric sizes..

(Finally got to sit on one the other day, I can ride a medium normally this was way too big and there is no small frame so that specific 29er's [s]are [/s]is out for me)

FTFY.

There are 'advantages' to all 3, you can decide if you think they're worthwhile. I reckon all 3 are likely to be here to stay.

I don't understand this - 650mm = 25.59". That makes it smaller than 26", doesn't it?

650mm = 25.59

+ a 2"[ish] tyre = ??

@derek - when you say it was too big though was that just because of the standover or was the reach a problem to? Personally I think standover height is irrelvant, how many people actually need to stand straddling the bike?

@derek - when you say it was too big though was that just because of the standover or was the reach a problem to? Personally I think standover height is irrelvant, how many people actually need to stand straddling the bike?

The reach, the height off the ground, i just felt well weird and not in the sort of way you would want to, we have lots of granny climbs round here and if the rear wheel slips going uphill.....

So whereas I agree that stand over isn't everything, just occasionally you do need to. I like with the reverb now to push the button and have both feet touch the ground, no way that would happen with that 29er medium, it's a big boys bike, in fact, reckon it's a Giants bike in a large or XL.

trail bikes wtf; xc bikes and downhill bikes cover everything that could be needed who needs a new niche in the middle.

The key thing with 650b is it's easier to package the rear wheel into current 26" designs and still gives some of the benefits of a bigger wheel.

Rumour is Trek are maybe going to make a political gesture

Trek Sixhundredandfiftibniner?

Not too keen on the 29" wheels, isn't the 650b the equivalent of about 27.5", that sounds about right to me!

derekrides - Member

Could someone explain to me why we need this wheel size, just after the big push to get us all to consider 29ers (Finally got to sit on one the other day, I can ride a medium normally this was way too big and there is no small frame so 29er's are out for me) am `i now going to be urged by all that a 650b is the future for Mountain Bikes?

The joke is on you. Or rather by you I mean, people who got sucked in by 29er hype. It's just marketing. When did you ever ride a bike and think "I wish it had bigger wheels to roll over stuff"

Yet another clever way to extract money from fools.

I, for one, welcome our new large wheel overlords.

Whats the problem? You don't HAVE to buy every bike that comes out. Do you buy every new shock, stem length, bar width, tyre tread, brake design etc as they come out?

When buying a new bike it gives more options. Try both, see which you prefer, put your money down?

When did you ever ride a bike and think "I wish it had bigger wheels to roll over stuff"

But thinking "I wish it had 150mm travel at both ends, an extra 5lbs of weight and huge tyres to roll over stuff", that's the sort of logic that justifies £3k bikes right? Those fools on their £150 Inbred 29ers!

muddyfunster - Member
The joke is on you. Or rather by you I mean, people who got sucked in by 29er hype. It's just marketing. When did you ever ride a bike and think "I wish it had bigger wheels to roll over stuff"

Yet another clever way to extract money from fools.

Well yes and no, I guess I am a bit of a victim for new kit, especially if I can see the advantage, and tbh I tended to agree with your view on the whole 29er thing and now I finally got to sit nearly astride one, I didn't need to ride it to realise it would be hopeless, so at least i hadn't bought it off the web to find out, that might have made me a fool.

Now had I been a lanky great bloke and they always complain about bikes not really fitting them well, which must be true if they fit me, then it must be good for them so there is some logic there, but where do you ever see it written? [b]"29er - bikes for big blokes"[/b].

So what's going to be the slogan for 27 1/2" inchers? [b]"Bikes for not big yet not small blokes"?[/b]

And 26ers? Will they become Dwarf fodder?

Buying a bike and realising you made a mistake, is that a 29er thing though? I bought a Mojo and found it rubbish, then bought a second hand Scandal 29er and it's been fantastic. Which one was foolish?

650B has been around for years. In the early days of mtb's the only fat tyres around were the 26" ones used on cruisers and the like so this became the 'standard' size by default. Over the years I've seen articles/interviews with bike engineers & designers who have stated a preference for 650B but the industry was never prepared to make the change.

Whilst in the States last year I tried to demo a 650B test bike but the shop had it booked out solidly for 8/9 weeks. Talking to the owner, he said there had been a rumour (more like conspiracy theory) floating round the bike industry out there that 29ers were dreamt up to get the mtbing world to take notice of a different wheel size. Once it got a foothold in the market and the great 26/29 debates started it left the door wide open for the 650B to come in as the prferred option, being able to combine the perceived benefits of both other sizes into one.....

I don't do conspiracies but the logic of the 650B wheel has some merit, IMHO of course.

Whilst in the States last year I tried to demo a 650B test bike but the shop had it booked out solidly for 8/9 weeks. Talking to the owner, he said there had been a rumour (more like conspiracy theory) floating round the bike industry out there that 29ers were dreamt up to get the mtbing world to take notice of a different wheel size. Once it got a foothold in the market and the great 26/29 debates started it left the door wide open for the 650B to come in as the prferred option, being able to combine the perceived benefits of both other sizes into one.....

I love this. And am now taking it to be fact. I love the fact you just stated.

[img] [/img]

Ah, so the master plan is fast forward five years and there will be no 29ers, no 26ers and 27.5ers will be standard for the ever diminishing mountain bike market. That makes more sense, would that it be the case.

in ten years time wheel size will be irrelevant, we'll all be hovering 6 inches above the trail....

Why was there not the same outrage when people suggested a 50mm, 55mm, 60mm, 65mm, 70mm, 75mm, 80mm, 85mm, 90mm, 95mm, 100mm, 105mm, 110mm, 115mm, 120mm stems?

Some people over think things, choice is good, finding something you like is even better. If you're happy with 26" wheels then good for you, if you like 29" wheel then that's cool too, you never know 650B might be good too.

The only reason to be afraid is that one day you'll stand next to someone one a 29er and say you prefer your 26" wheels as they make the bike more manoeuvrable and chuckable, then he/she will make you look a bit silly on some singletrack and/or jumps.

thisisnotaspoon

Why was there not the same outrage when peole suggested a 50mm, 55mm, 60mm, 65mm, 70mm, 75mm, 80mm, 85mm, 90mm, 95mm, 100mm, 105mm, 110mm, 115mm, 120mm stems?

Are stems not, a bit, like, just a bit.....more interchangeable? Than say .....a wheelset that necessitates an entirely new frame, and forks, and tyres, and geometry.

I mean, I can change my stem without changing my entire bike....and yet when I try to change to 29er wheels I find that it is not quite so easy.

thisisnotaspoon
The only reason to be afraid is that one day you'll stand next to someone one a 29er and say you prefer your 26" wheels as they make the bike more manoeuvrable and chuckable, then he/she will [s]make you look a bit silly on some singletrack and/or jumps[/s] bore you to tears talking about how it rolls over obstacles better and is so good for climbing closely followed by the revelation that they don't really "get mountainbiking" and they just wanted something that was good for getting them to work and they thought that mountainbikes looked tough and cool but it's great because they can put some 700c road tyres on it and then it's really great on the road but yet despite this they still harbour the opinion that 26" wheels are inferior and just not right for tall people and 650b is just a cynical marketing ploy unlike 29ers which really are the future and a genuine inovative improvement and well worth shelling out 2k for a new bike on instead of upgrading the 26" bike they had because it was totally redundant with it's small wheels..

I love this. And am now taking it to be fact. I love the fact you just stated.

It must be fact - a muurken said so. 😉

id be well happy for 650b to replace all 26ers and 29ers,
too many standards is a pita

kimbers - Member

id be well happy for 650b to replace all 26ers and 29ers,
too many standards is a [s]pita[/s] another way for bike manufactures to justify ass raping us with massive costs

has anyone ever actually had someone come upto them on a 29er and "bore you to tears"? Or has this mythical boring 29er riding mountainbiker been made up?

There must be 10x more "I don't like a choice of wheel sizes" threads than threads started about the apparent benefits of 29ers?

For the record the bandit sizing is odd, you go up one to normal, I bought a large even though I ride mediums

thisisnotaspoon - Member

has anyone ever actually had someone come upto them on a 29er and "bore you to tears"? Or has this mythical boring 29er riding mountainbiker been made up?

I have. Do I win a prize? He'd worked out how far he'd go for each turn of the crank relative to the wheel size of each bike too. He used it mainly for going to work as the bigger tyres meant he could ride up and down kerbs more easily than on a hybrid.

too many standards is another way for bike manufactures to justify ass raping us with massive costs

You're not paranoid, they really are after you!

If you don't want one then what's the issue? No ones forcing you to buy a new bike.

No ones forcing you to buy a new bike

No one's going out of their way to standardize production and distribution to drive down costs either are they?

"Could someone explain to me why we need this wheel size"

Because some suckers will buy it. It's called marketing.

I find most people who own 29ers are too busy riding to bother boring people

has anyone ever actually had someone come upto them on a 29er and "bore you to tears"? Or has this mythical boring 29er riding mountainbiker been made up?

Aren't 29er riders like Apple Mac owners - they feel the need to convert everyone else?

Aren't 29er riders like Apple Mac owners - they feel the need to convert everyone else?

29er riders are Jehovah Witnesses?

What does 650 'b' stand for is it metric, imperial?

650b, 700c etc are all old french metric tyre size designations. The "650" denotes approximate outside diameter of an inflated tyre, the b or c refers to width. Originally the French system had tyre widths from a through to e with a being the narrowest. The astute among you have already realised that modern "650b" tyres are neither 650mm in OD, nor use tyres which are narrower than a standard "700c" road tyre at ~23mm. So "650b" is not really 650b, in much the same way "700c" is not 700c as per the original French system.

As the ETRTO began to standardise tyre sizes, and manufacturers wanted to stock less variants of rims, tyres and spokes (you think having three standards will be bad - go back 60-70 years and there were many many more) we were left with a few commonly used sizes for adult bikes.

559mm (bead seat diameter - the radius of where the bead of the tyre fits under the rim hook) which we know better as 26"
The "650's" hung on a little, 650c (571mm bsd) for pursuit front wheels, small road bikes and some tri bikes, 650b (584mm) until recent times on French touring bikes and now on "mtb 650b".
622mm is current road/hybrid/touring/29er standard.

Most everything else, including the venerable 27x1 1/4" is basically on the way out if not already dead.

Much more on sheldonbrown.com

In light of the fact that they're not THAT much bigger than a 26'er with a big tyre on, if you could get some fairly low profile tyres would a set of 650b wheels fit in a normal 26'er frame?

And if they do, what's the point because obviously they'd have the same diameter (including tyre) that you'd have with a 26 inch wheel running a larger tyre.

I've answered my own question there......

Aren't 29er riders like Apple Mac owners

I'd post a quick witter rreply but my PC crashed so now it's 8 minutes late

In light of the fact that they're not THAT much bigger than a 26'er with a big tyre on, if you could get some fairly low profile tyres would a set of 650b wheels fit in a normal 26'er frame?

And if they do, what's the point because obviously they'd have the same diameter (including tyre) that you'd have with a 26 inch wheel running a larger tyre.

You could, in the same way as road bike wheels fit in MTB frames to make nice commuter bikes (IME). Guess the advantage would be you could run narrow tyres without making the wheels smaller if that was necessary as most bike tyres are vaguely circular in cross section?

Do people still argue over this shit.

Ride what ever wheel size you want.

No one else cares.