Forum menu
Maths: 26 x 2.1 = 7...
 

[Closed] Maths: 26 x 2.1 = 700c x ?

Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 
[#7547760]

For comfort over moderately bumpy tracks on a rigid bike. How much does a larger wheel size compensate for lower tyre volume?

Whilst I'll happily ride my rigid MTB anywhere on 26 x 2.1" tyres, last time I put 1.5" slick tyres on it for commuting and then took it on some easy offroad it wasn't really much fun on the stonier sections. But most of the current flavour of the month adventure/gravel bikes come with skinnier tyres than that.


 
Posted : 31/12/2015 6:38 pm
Posts: 14484
Free Member
 

My old steel 26er HT nearly resulted in me buying a FS. (2.25tyres)

My current Alu 29er is making me consider rigid forks. (2.2s)


 
Posted : 31/12/2015 6:42 pm
Posts: 15555
Free Member
 

Tough question as there are so many variables.. Fork type, wheel size and width, tyre size and width.. Materials, geometry, suspension or not, how much travel if you have suspension.. Blah blah blah

I think as always it boils down to what you use the bike for the most, tarmac, dirt roads, bridal way, trail, downhill.. And build /buy accordingly.

Or just buy 10 bikes in different styles!

I'd guess a short travel hard tail with light cross country mtb tyres, for me at least is the best compromise.. Not pparticularl good at either extreme but copes well with most stuff.


 
Posted : 31/12/2015 6:51 pm