[Closed] Is 650b... dying?

He repeatedly said "The time wasn't enough" - so if it was 100ths of second quicker here or there during testing - it's not significant - so why take the risk of moving to the 29er - that is what I understood. He never said it was "clearly faster" did he?

The guy's been riding 26" all his life, learned his trade on it and gives a 29er a 'go' for a few runs and decides not to run it. No surprise there really. Going fast down a test track is one thing, pulling it out of the bag in competition with all the nerves and pressure, with their reputations on the line is something completely different and they're obviously going to choose something they feel more familiar with.

If 29ers do crack DH it won't be this generation of riders who do it - not while they are given the choice or without a nudge from a rule change or changes to the tracks that favour 29ers, it'll be the next generation who have had more time on 29ers and can make the transition easier. If 29ers are able to go faster then the riders need to learn how to ride them and it's going to take more than a few timed out of season practice runs to do that even for these talented riders.

But 29ers may never crack DH. Maybe 650b is the sweet spot for DH. Is it really that difficult to imaging a world with.........2 wheel sizes?

The guy's been riding 26" all his life, learned his trade on it and gives a 29er a 'go' for a few runs and decides not to run it. No surprise there really. Going fast down a test track is one thing, pulling it out of the bag in competition with all the nerves and pressure, with their reputations on the line is something completely different and they're obviously going to choose something they feel more familiar with.

Yeah....but I thought everyone got KOM's on Strava as soon as they put a leg over a 29er. I mean, Steve Jones said so.

If 29ers do crack DH it won't be this generation of riders who do it - not while they are given the choice or without a nudge from a rule change or changes to the tracks that favour 29ers, it'll be the next generation who have had more time on 29ers and can make the transition easier.

They made the transition to 27.5 fine, why would another 1.5 inches be so much harder? Could it be, maybe...just maybe....because 29ers are shit?

You're really not keen on 29ers then Tom? 😀

If Giant capitulate then yes....until then I expect people to ride the bikes that fit them best. Never understood the wheel aggro/angst

Tom_W1987 - Member

Yeah....but I thought everyone got KOM's on Strava as soon as they put a leg over a 29er. I mean, Steve Jones said so.

And not only that, but it was the only time in his entire career that Jones ever clearly expressed an opinion. And he did it in video too, not upside down in invisible ink on a flourescent background, with half the sentence cut off at the bottom of the page

I'll be surprised if we don't see a lot more 29ers in downhill but I'll also be surprised if we don't continue to see 27.5 in enduro.

The thing many forget is that enduro racers have minimal practice and are often having to thread tight lines and make quick changes and adjustments because they're riding almost blind on very long tracks. On more open rocky courses the 29 seem more popular but once it's tighter woods trails the pumping and flicking on the 27.5 is easier.

Longer front-centres are certainly helping stop riders having to get so far back when mincing down steeps, which should help a lot with the 29er scrotum clearance issue.

Blimey TomW, you're a bit grumpy over this - did Steve Jones bum your dog?

FWIW what I heard in that from Danny Hart is that he went back to what he knew better, even though his implication is that in testing the 29er was marginally faster despite him having less time on it and not fully knowing its limits (ask any of the top 10 if they'd ride a bike that gave them a tenth of a second advantage and see what they say) - reason? Well, pretty much just to make a change (altered race weather and snapped chain were 2 of his 3 comments)

The other two, fair enough - they clearly didn't like it though both had done hardly any time on them and BF in particular was implying that he hadn't found its limits yet "felt like I was on the edge ... obviously wasn't")

(and let's be fair, 650b isn't half way in-between the two really - fair bit closer to 26 in size and feel I imagine)

I don't care what they ride - I'll never own a DH frame so the wheels they may choose to use is an irrelevance to me. As said above somewhere, I tried a "top" 29er trailbike recently (coming from 26) and was NOT blown away by it but I'll keep an open mind since I only rode it for a day

The thing many forget is that enduro racers have minimal practice and are often having to thread tight lines and make quick changes and adjustments because they're riding almost blind on very long tracks. On more open rocky courses the 29 seem more popular but once it's tighter woods trails the pumping and flicking on the 27.5 is easier.

And yet some are hammering they way down on 29 with no issues.

Wheel size arguments are truly a straw clutching exercise at making anything support your point of view.
Give sc have been running the 29 v10 for longer than any one else it's not a surprise they are doing well.
Id also best tell Jack moir he probably wants to get the old bike out for garbanzo this week

I've been on 29 for ages, since they were confused barges and I also own a 650.

I've got a bit bored now of the 29er and exploring the b+ options. Which is in a way a 29er.

Maybe 650b+ is the true future as it's both at the same time. 🙂

...if i ran a 29er rear i'd have no scrotum left...

Katy Winton is 5 foot 3 and rides a Trek Slash 29er...

I doubt Katy Winton has much of her scrotum left, in fairness. 😉

to the gents of STW, do you get into your ride gear and look in the mirror going damm thats a mighty low ball sac I've got there...
#LookingForExcuses

to the gents of STW, do you get into your ride gear and look in the mirror going damm thats a mighty low ball sac I've got there

No, but i look at tracks that are too easy and think 'Wow, all the tight twisty technical sections have been sanitized to cater for the wagon wheel crew'

Go faster then... Not seeing much 29r sanitised trails on my travels or skillful riders struggling with bikes that fit them.

No, but i look at tracks that are too easy and think 'Wow, all the tight twisty technical sections have been sanitized to cater for the wagon wheel crew'

I don't believe that happens. I do believe that trails get changed for "better flow" but a lot of the time I'd leave them alone if I was in charge because I believe one of the great things in MTBing is managing to flow on trails that try to upset that flow.

Wow, all the tight twisty technical sections have been sanitized to cater for the wagon wheel crew'

None of my local trails have changed. I am however riding them faster than ive ever done - on my 29er.

If 650b disappeared then buying a 29er would offer no more security in being a good "purchase". Because as we've seen, it wouldn't be long before another wheel size (probably smaller) was back on the scene as the latest thing.

Wow, all the tight twisty technical sections have been sanitized to cater for the wagon wheel crew

I thought we were blaming that on Strava?

chiefgrooveguru - Member 
I don't believe that happens. I do believe that trails get changed for "better flow" but a lot of the time I'd leave them alone if I was in charge because I believe one of the great things in MTBing is managing to flow on trails that try to upset that flow.

Not changed by trail builders but I'm seeing a lot of short cuts on technical trails, which is really getting quite depressing to see as well as making a mess. Blame Strava for that though more than wheel size, though maybe the two go together. Can't get fast enough time on Strava due to big wheel size, so short cut it.

I don't believe that happens. I do believe that trails get changed for "better flow" but a lot of the time I'd leave them alone if I was in charge because I believe one of the great things in MTBing is managing to flow on trails that try to upset that flow.

Quite honestly I think this already happened or is happening with 27.5.

I had to laugh as 2 7yr olds blasted past a load of adults on 29ers on Sunday on a really tight twisty track designed for 26ers and not yet rebuilt for 29...

Sadly I next time they fell the trees I expect they will rebuild the track for 29

Looks like 26 is on its way back, oh but that size is now designated to kids bikes.. 😕

stevextc - Member

Quite honestly I think this already happened or is happening with 27.5.

I had to laugh as 2 7yr olds blasted past a load of adults on 29ers on Sunday on a really tight twisty track designed for 26ers and not yet rebuilt for 29...

Sadly I next time they fell the trees I expect they will rebuild the track for 29

[tongue at least passively in cheek]
Misplaced teenaged angst? In my day we were angsty about politics and girls, not about others line choices.

TBH I never noticed a lack of maneuverability in 29ers. Possibly because the front wheel didn't need it's own postcode to get some stability.

Where are all these 29er specific tracks? Is there a colour grading system like for those old skool trail centers built in the 2000's for 26" wheels? With their buffed smooth surfaces and bermed corners?

Are 26" riders just lost roadies with no upper body strength to turn the bars and a fear of rougher lines than their established ones?

[/tongue at least passively in cheek]

It's been successfully pushed, so the industry is bored of it I'm guessing.

Both of my bikes are 650b. I'm more concerned by Boost killing my stuff off than a push to 29ers.

The 29ers in DH debate will continue by I expect the field will remain split; some will get it and love the and others won't. It might change once we have 'proper' 29ers and not different rear ends popped on an existing frame. Ultimately I don't know and I'm not that fussed at this stage.

[i] they will rebuild the track for 29[/i]

As above - who are these riders who can't turn corners on their 29ers?
Smells like bullshit to me.

All the new lines at my local park (QECP) are nothing to do with 29ers, or any other wheelsize - they're just made by shit riders who can't ride the old lines. Usually because they had tree roots on them... Ooh, can't ride [i]bumps[/i], lets stay on the smooth stuff!

Oh balls. I've joined a wheelsize debate 😥

Ooh, can't ride bumps, lets stay on the smooth stuff!

Oh balls. I've joined a wheelsize debate

Seems you are trying to kick off a ball size debate

Seems you are trying to kick off a ball size debate

We covered that on page 2.

29ers are only suitable for those with small or no balls.

I've always been of the opinion that for an average Joe like me that rides for fun 650b is a totally pointless wheel size, I've ridden a couple of 650b full sussers and hardtails and didn't notice any real difference.

I was anti 29er too until I bought a 29er hardtail out of curiosity earlier this year, I didn't want to like it but I really like the big wheels now.

My full susser is 26" but could be changed to 650b with different dropouts but I won't do it as it would be just spending a load of money pointlessly. I tend to keep my bikes quite a few years but if I was buying a new bike I wouldn't even consider 650b as modern 29ers are so good.

For me 26 and 29 are the only sizes I'd ride, and don't even get me started on that boost rubbish 😆

[i]29ers are only suitable for those with small or no balls.[/i]

Damn! This is news to me! Anyone wanna buy a Big Top?

Misplaced teenaged angst? In my day we were angsty about politics and girls, not about others line choices.

TBH I never noticed a lack of maneuverability in 29ers. Possibly because the front wheel didn't need it's own postcode to get some stability.

Where are all these 29er specific tracks? Is there a colour grading system like for those old skool trail centers built in the 2000's for 26" wheels? With their buffed smooth surfaces and bermed corners?

Are 26" riders just lost roadies with no upper body strength to turn the bars and a fear of rougher lines than their established ones?

Semi-tongue in cheek reply ..

Try following someone on a 26 (or 24) through really tight woods... of course the wheelbase and bars have also got longer .(but wheelbase and wheel size are not totally unlinked).. so it's not simply wheel size but the difference is noticeable.

I was chatting to the other Dad and we dropped behind and catching the kids up was a hell of a job because every 180 switchback we had to practically stop and endo the rear round until it hits a tree then climb the roots ... then just be getting speed back when the next tight twist takes it away..

That really what made it so noticeable in that we'd gain the ground on straighter bits and then the kids could sail round the corners and by the time we got round they were off again.
Even unfit as I am I'd have no problem catching the kid on a wider trail...

Where are all these 29er specific tracks?

The thing is it can be more fun having a trail that pushes you and the bike the right amount.
To take the two end points.... a fun trail on a 29er is less fun on a 26er and visa versa. Whereby it can be fun to track-stand then inch the bike around on a couple of corners doing it on every single corner stops being fun.

Equally wheelbase isn't such a issue if you can just endo and wheely up the whole climb..or just use a 29er monocycle. I can't think why trials riders aren't using 29ers - just basic lack of skill I guess???

Misplaced teenaged angst? In my day we were angsty about politics and girls, not about others line choices.

Its not about others line choices it's about line choices being taken away.
If you take trail centres then the old lines are taped off or have ditches dug and tree trunks to prevent that choice. I understand why they need to rebuild ... (or we'd all be riding 10' deep ruts) but what I noticed is each rebuild that the track gets wider and less tight. Rather than put in a new line whilst the forest recovers then move back the lines get progressively wider.

TBH I never noticed a lack of maneuverability in 29ers. Possibly because the front wheel didn't need it's own postcode to get some stability.

Which is why I say the fun-sweet-spot is different between 29ers and 26ers.
Unfortunately the lowest common denominator on man made trails is usually your average Joe on a 29er... there is just less fun doing these on a 650B or 26er so though you were tongue in cheek I think perhaps they could build some specifically tighter trails that are less fun on a 29er and more fun on 26ers... as well. Frankly I don't mind if they also stick some e-bike more specific bits as well or XC specific trails like Sherwood.... but I think it's a loss to the sport to abandon former tighter lines completely in favour of trails built with Joe public in a 29er where they can enjoy their stability without those pesky tight bends...

It's the same with DH.... FW is naturally 29er friendly... but if the entire DH race scene becomes copies of FW it will lose something.

Which is why I say the fun-sweet-spot is different between 29ers and 26ers.
Unfortunately the lowest common denominator on man made trails is usually your average Joe on a 29er

Your argument almost makes sense, except that average joe was on a 26" bike, so you end in a chicken and egg predicament that at some point someone conspired to make all the trails wider to accommodate 29ers which at no one rode, thus forcing everyone out to buy more bikes?

New trails aren't wider than old trails when they were new. New trails are always wide and smooth because that's just how trail centers get built, the trail then narrows and gets rutted as the vegetation grows back over it and lines start to form. So new 'trail center style' trails always seem sanitised, but they're just new.

I've ridden 29ers since before they were cool, my local riding is Swinley (so a Rowan Sorrel tight-switchbacked-berm-fest), the army ranges (so a plethora of tight steep switchbacked rooty corners) and chiltern bridleways (mehhh, but it's nice for a day out in the sunshine). I notice that the 29ers roll over trail detritus more, but I genuinely don't get the "29ers can't corner".

I wouldn't even consider 650b as modern 29ers are so good.

I have no idea why anyone would limit their options based on one very small part of a bike, when there are so many more factors to consider.

Yours,

Nobeer - owner of a 650b FS and a 29 FS.

TBH I never noticed a lack of maneuverability in 29ers. Possibly because the front wheel didn't need it's own postcode to get some stability.

Its not the wheel size, its the geometry. My 2014 Anthem is not as manoeuvrable as my 2016 carbon HT. Both 29ers.

Your argument almost makes sense, except that average joe was on a 26" bike, so you end in a chicken and egg predicament that at some point someone conspired to make all the trails wider to accommodate 29ers which at no one rode, thus forcing everyone out to buy more bikes?

New trails aren't wider than old trails when they were new. New trails are always wide and smooth because that's just how trail centers get built, the trail then narrows and gets rutted as the vegetation grows back over it and lines start to form. So new 'trail center style' trails always seem sanitised, but they're just new.

I've ridden 29ers since before they were cool, my local riding is Swinley (so a Rowan Sorrel tight-switchbacked-berm-fest), the army ranges (so a plethora of tight steep switchbacked rooty corners) and chiltern bridleways (mehhh, but it's nice for a day out in the sunshine). I notice that the 29ers roll over trail detritus more, but I genuinely don't get the "29ers can't corner".

I don't think its a conspiracy.... it's just a drift.
If you look at Swinley the Red 21 and the unofficial free ride area just past are mostly still 26er tight.
If you ride labyrinth and follow someone on shorter wheels you'll see what I mean on manoeuvrability.

If you ride the "new loop" stating at Red 1 on the other hand the trails are much less tight than before it was rebuilt and being Swinley this is a chainsaw job... its not just choosing an alternate path for the forest to recover but felling trees to make the trails less twisty. Red 25 on the other hand is rebuilt and really wide and no tight corners (at least not tight on a 27.5) and the old way up has been switched for a more 29er friendly way up... incidentally I like Red 25.... I just don't want the whole playgound to be like that any more than I want the whole lot to be like Labyrinth/Red 21.

Anyway... my point is if you find Swinley a "switchbacked-berm-fest" then you'd find it less so on a 27.5 or 26...

I notice that the 29ers roll over trail detritus more, but I genuinely don't get the "29ers can't corner".

One reason I notice his so much is because mostly I ride behind a 24er .... and have on occasion done this on a 29er as well. I'm also coaching the kid so watching him and reviewing video with him...

Fit as he is he is (for a 7yr old) he's still along way of beating me in a race (unfit as I am) but I notice that specific trails he is really pushing me vs other trails I end up on the brakes the whole time. (We don't just ride Swinley but ride Swinley more than most) The connection is on tighter tracks where his short 24er is simply just shorter and has a smaller turning circle ... he's just smoother than me on a 27.5 or 29er because I am almost stopping on the tightest spots whereas he can actually accelerate through the corner where I need to manual or endo.

On the other hand on some of the wider stuff I'm not even pedalling on the downhills and I'm having to hit the brakes .. the bigger wheels just roll faster.

The connection is on tighter tracks where his short 24er is simply just shorter and has a smaller turning circle ... he's just smoother than me on a 27.5 or 29er because I am almost stopping on the tightest spots whereas he can actually accelerate through the corner where I need to manual or endo.

This is not an argument against big wheels, it's an argument against long wheelbases.

This is not an argument against big wheels, it's an argument against long wheelbases.

And wee wheels that accelerate quicker?.

If you ride the "new loop" stating at Red 1 on the other hand the trails are much less tight than before it was rebuilt and being Swinley this is a chainsaw job... its not just choosing an alternate path for the forest to recover but felling trees to make the trails less twisty. Red 25 on the other hand is rebuilt and really wide and no tight corners (at least not tight on a 27.5) and the old way up has been switched for a more 29er friendly way up... incidentally I like Red 25.... I just don't want the whole playgound to be like that any more than I want the whole lot to be like Labyrinth/Red 21.

But when the 'original' new trails were built, they were also hugely wide and smooth. The forest just slowly grows over them as the lines wear in.

If anything Seagull has been getting tighter and twistier from it's original 'natural' incarnation, to the first built version, witches lair and now the new-old-natural bit.

And wee wheels that accelerate quicker?.

They don't (in the way people make out) though. A 29er wheel weighing 10% more with take 10% more energy to get upto speed, but that's it's weight not it's diameter.

And the difference in weight (to quote the often quoted line) is significantly less than a decent poo.

No one claims the new lines are the result of people needing a poo and the fact the toilets close when the cafe shuts.

They don't (in the way people make out) though.

Greg Minaar seems to think they do, I'll go with what he says, rather than you.

This is not an argument against big wheels, it's an argument against long wheelbases.

The two are not independent though.
I'm not saying you can't have a longer wheelbase 26/650B but you can't have a short wheelbase 29er...(and still pedal on tight bends)

They don't (in the way people make out) though. A 29er wheel weighing 10% more with take 10% more energy to get upto speed, but that's it's weight not it's diameter.

Nope its diameter

Angular momentum (what you wish to achieve in acceleration) is a product of the moment of inertia that is R^2 so increasing weight on a 29er rim increases more than the same weight on a smaller rim.

Greg Minaar seems to think they do, I'll go with what he says, rather than you.

Physics disagrees.

Angular momentum (what you wish to achieve in acceleration) is a product of the moment of inertia that is R^2 so increasing weight on a 29er rim increases more than the same weight on a smaller rim.

Go on, quote the whole formula.........

mv=p (note the lack of any r's in that formula and the same formula applies to angular as it does to linear acceleration, you just define v slightly differently).

This is the actual one you're interested in, note that if V stays the same (both bikes are at the same speed) then p is proportional to m.

The one you're quoting from is I=r2m simply shows that a 29er wheel has greater moment of inertia, but that is canceled out by the fact that a 26er has to spin faster to achieve the same velocity at the rim.

So yes a 29er wheel is harder to accelerate, but it's not some horrible square law that bike journos would have you believe, it's simply a function of weight. And for the most part bike wheels have been getting lighter over time. (Mavic 26" 717's are about 50g heavier than 29er Crests)

It's taken me a long time to come round to the idea of buying a 29er but I have it's partly because all the industry faff around [i]"Superseding"[/i] 26" with 27.5" and all the "Re-standardisation" that has accompanied it, but it's primarily because there now seem to be a few 29er HTs with the sort of geometry I actually want...

The marketing BS and media narrative shifted from [i]29" wheels = XC/marathon bikes[/i] to [i]29" wheels are actually quite good for general trail riding and that there #Enduro[/i], and before you know it there's a few Long/Low/Slack 29er frame appearing on the market...

I don't want to change my MTB every other year, I've had my Current 26" HT for at least 5 years and the frame was 2nd hand when I bought it, if I can't get 5-6 years out of the 29" replacement I'll be rather surprised and disappointed...

But I'm not touching the "tweener wheelz" as there's some new bollox at that end of the market every other day now and I don't actually think all the latest and greatest [i]"plus/boost"[/i] nonsense really makes as much difference as the kool-aid purveyors or drinkers seem to claim...

Sort the angles, make it lighter if you can, bigger wheels roll over stuff a shade better so I'll take them, and that's about all that really matters to me, all the rest is just noise now...

Is 650b Dead?
Of course not! There's a shed load of sales left in it yet, I bet the follow on to "Plus" Tyres will be some sort of "Mid" designation for ~2.6" and "Super-plus" for a 3.2" just so they can niche the living crap out of things, don't forget "Road plus" is with us now, there's going to be a lots of ways for them to inch riders along the new bike every 24 months "Roadmap"...

stevextc - Member

I'm not saying you can't have a longer wheelbase 26/650B but you can't have a short wheelbase 29er...(and still pedal on tight bends)

While that's true, we got past the point where 29ers and overlap placed a significant limiter on bike size in about 2012. These days it's just not really relevant. When you're looking at dh bikes in particular the 29ers don't have to be bigger. (some are; minaar looks like he finally has a bike that fits)

The growth of bikes isn't anything to do with 29ers (other than that it probably made some influential people think again about size) but it's complimented it well, as have stronger lightweight wheels, longer lightweight forks, proper tyres etc... In 2010 I wanted coil lyriks and 721s for my use, and that on a 29er scale was trouble, but these days I can have lightweight carbon or 481 rims, sensible weight 36s, etc.

Well, I'm keeping my 650b for the moment. I've only got it because that's the size that bike comes in now and I wanted the geometry it offers, and fits right.

29ers can be the new great thing, but they're too big for me.

And I still love my 26ers.

None are dead. If they aren't hip any more, they're just retro.

a hell of a job because every 180 switchback we had to practically stop and endo the rear round until it hits a tree then climb the roots

I've got 26" rims and just about 29" wheel diameter though

Wow, all the tight twisty technical sections have been sanitized to cater for the wagon wheel crew'

That's might close to tin foil hat for me... but some of my local official trails have been sanitised recently, but it's more of a monetary thing. BPW aside there's very little money or manpower for maintenance so when a feature or section wears out and starts giving the HSE guy palpitations they seem to favour resurfacing the whole section as flat as a pancake because it's the quickest way to do it 🙁

The two are not independent though.
I'm not saying you can't have a longer wheelbase 26/650B but you can't have a short wheelbase 29er...(and still pedal on tight bends)

But to summarise, one of them causes global warming and cat aids, the other is pointless and everyone loves 26 and there was never a bad 26 bike ever. Time to go ride bikes some more.

P-Jay - Member

when a feature or section wears out and starts giving the HSE guy palpitations they seem to favour resurfacing the whole section as flat as a pancake because it's the quickest way to do it

It's the best way to do it, with armoured trail. Well, not removing a feature but it's like car paint damage, the best way to do it is to respray the entire panel, not to go at it with touch-up paint.

When we fix a damaged section- even if it's something simple like a seep that's broken the trail surface or bad braking bumps- we dig up the damage like removing decay, and the bit around it to key it in so that new material will bind, and we remove any crappy soil that'll undermine the strength of the repair- and that basically means taking away everything that you'd recognise as the trail.

Then we fill, and whacker plate the shit out of it. What's left is something that looks like a BMX track. But then it wears back in.

The way I think of it is we don't build a finished trail, we plant a trail seed. And then encroachment, weather and riders turn it into a trail. I'm a nerd but it's interesting to me- we can rebuild a section and everyone goes "sanitised! You've ruined it, we liked it how it was" but in 2 years time they'll forget what it looked like, and if we dug it up again then they'd say "we liked it how it was"

Everything we build this way starts out looking shit and ends up falling apart but it's the years and millions of wheels in between that count. If we could build a worn-in trail we would but you can only really get close to that with as-dug and that's not realistic when you've got high traffic and long trail life.

(the enduro stages we build evolve too, but they start out feeling close to the finished article)

I have been on 29ers for four years or so and have recently got my first 650b. 29er is lls fs and 650b lls ht.

For one reason or another I have not used the fs since I got the ht so was pondering whilst up at gisburn the other day what size I would choose if I could only have one.....

Couldn't decide as they both have certain great characteristics that I would miss. I'm sticking by my theory that 29ers are best 95% of the time but since I got the 650b I reckon the missing 5% is the most fun!

Oh, and those still banging on that there's no difference between 650b and 26" are as wrong now as they were 5 years ago.

Well if anyone doesn't want their old 650b wheels any more let me know as I am about to look for a set (standard qr) for a build based on one of those charge cross frames, cheers