[Closed] bad news but the 26" wheel is dead

if everyone with 26" wheels will please move over to retrobike it will leave space to explore the 650c options here

An lbs tells it like it is re:wheelsize http://singletrackworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/tuesday-treats-79-moose-cycles/

Desperate? why would it matter to me?

Mrs C just CHOSE a 26" wheel over comparative options.

A) Because she's a genius and B) It was right for her.

boosh

It seems to matter enough for you to ignore the facts

😀 you haven't presented any....

Bloody hell. Is this crap still going?

The OP was the biggest trailing leg since Gareth Bale last ran into a penalty area and here you all are still flogging away at it.

At least the troll OP has had some fun.........

spectabilis - Member
It seems to matter enough for you to ignore the facts
you haven't presented any....

I'd direct you to read the whole thread again as lots of posters have done just that but it's pointless as you'll just continue to just read the parts you want to rather than the truth

I can't hear you....

[img] [/img]

😆

[quote=brant]Did the road bike forums do this when annoying metric 700c replaced 27in?

Obviously not, no. Because:

a) the internet didn't exist
b) high end wheels were still tubs, which just happened to be the same size as 700c, this dropping 27" actually made a lot of sense in the way that introducing 650b doesn't.

As far as roll-over goes, I've always thought that the wheels (or the trails) don't give a stuff how tall you are - all they know how much momentum you're carrying. But that's also assuming to some extent the rider isn't moving about as per the height example earlier. Less so, but getting to the point where the Germans would try to make a computer model of it all and I'd say f-it ride them and see how it feels : )

Your centre of gravity definitely matters with rollover, as does the movement of your arms and legs - the lower you are then the easier it is to keep weight off the front wheel. Big tyres definitely help too, giving the equivalent of a rearward axle path to reduce deceleration and thus the loading on the front wheel that causes the bike to decelerate more. That's just based on me on smaller wheels - the big tyres climb over stuff way better than skinny tyres and when I'm standing tall rather than getting low the bike is much worse at rolling over the rough.

It's an interesting conundrum this 'new' wheel size thing. It seems that a lot of new bike buyers are happy to buy a bike with 1" larger wheels, either because they've bought into the marketing spin or because the industry's sudden removal of 26" has scared them about future support or a bit of both, hence the consumer is inadvertently driving the speed of change. Over on the MTBR Banshee forum it looks like those buying a whole new bike rather than just a frame and using their old parts are going with the slightly bigger wheels (they run either due to swappable dropouts).

If the average height of a MTBer was over 6' so that most frames were M/L/XL rather than S/M/L I think 29ers would have become far far more popular - but there's definitely a packaging issue with getting bars low enough, chainstays short enough, no toe overlap and enough mud clearance if you want longer suspension travel. I don't think I know anyone shorter than 5'9 riding a suspended 29er although I ride amongst quite a lot of 29ers.

Lol @ Spectabilis 😆

pjbarton - Member
And it's super quick to change direction - not really fitting the industry clichés!

You're [i]really[/i] on 650b aren't you? You can tell us. We're all friends here. 😉

I have adapted this quote from Skyfall to describe the process of what is going on in the bike industry, and this forum, with this wheel size crap:

"So how do you get rats to change wheel size, hmm? My grandmother showed me. We buried an oil drum, and hinged the lid. Then we wired 26" wheels to the lid as bait. The rats come for the wheels, and... They fall into the drum, and after a month, you've trapped all the rats. But what did you do then? Throw the drum into the ocean? Burn it? No. You just leave it. And they begin to get hungry, then one by one... They start eating each other [on forum threads like this], until there are only two left. The two survivors. And then what - do you kill them? No. You take them, and release them into the trees. Only now, they don't ride 26" wheels anymore. Now they will only eat 650b."

I'm not saying you're all rats, but you get the idea...

Your centre of gravity definitely matters with rollover, as does the movement of your arms and legs

What you're saying about getting low is right, or getting further back to do the same sort of thing. We're not a rigid mass so the simple model of a higher c of g and the front axle tipping point doesn't work as well for a dynamic rider on a bike. A taller rider has more room to move that weight around so we could say they're more able to account for lower roll-over of small wheels (or geo/packaging of big wheels as you say), or they need the roll-over of big wheels if they're less dynamic riders. It's down to the individual as a rider rather than as a set of measurements.

chiefgrooveguru - Member

It's an interesting conundrum this 'new' wheel size thing. It seems that a lot of new bike buyers are happy to buy a bike with 1" larger wheels, either because they've bought into the marketing spin or because the industry's sudden removal of 26" has scared them about future support or a bit of both,

I've said this before but I think it's mostly this complicated- 26 inch works really well but isn't exactly interesting. 29ers introduced a curiosity and desire for change, and also work really well, but never overcame the fear of change as it seemed like quite a big step.

650b capitalises on all of these things- it satisfies the desire for novelty, while being such a small change that people are less afraid of it.

Course, the outcome is that the disruption/cost of the change is identical to 29ers but the result is far smaller but that's probably not all that important to novelty-buyers and novelty-sellers. After all if you've already got a bike, you're not buying a bike, you're buying a change.

Me, I just bought a new front triangle for my 26 inch bike to keep it going but I think even for a misanthropic cynic like me, spending a lot on a 26 inch bike or frame now is probably not very smart. It's not progress in my book but the game has changed. But the end result is, I'm refitting old bikes and making them last longer rather than buying a new bike. (I would have bought a new frame last month otherwise)

At the end of the day it's a net-loss game IMO and they're always stupid.

Me, I just bought a new front triangle for my 26 inch bike...

Considering you ride a hardtail, that's impressive.

I think it's a good thing, as long as you have a 26er frame with a tapered head tube you're sorted and there'll be forks and wheels around for a good few years in various juicy bargain form. It might even kick start the second hand market again.

Choice is good, without choice we'd be Communists and not Capitalists. All bikes would look the same and be the same price and there'd be no advances in technology and we'd all eat cheese sandwiches for lunch every day.

what's wrong with Wensleydale?

bad news but the 26" wheel is dead

shit I've just bought a new 26'er fork 😆

I've just bought a new 26'er fork

Pimpmaster Jazz - Member

Considering you ride a hardtail, that's impressive.

One man can have more than one bicycle (though [i]apparently[/i] 7 is too many)

Is it in the classfieds yet?

Darn, I'm slipping up

One man can have more than one bicycle (though apparently 7 is too many)

It always amazes me that people don't understand how each bike has a highly specific job.