[Closed] Toe curling 650b marketing guff.

I love specialized and their sitting on the fence and seeing what happens with 650b stance. Where in reality they forgot to order their 650b wheels.

Wrong. They were testing 650b three years ago.

After watching that I would never buy a Giant product if there was a chance that it would contribute to that pillock's wages.

An eminent cycling journalist 😉 told me a few months back that there was no real difference for the average rider. That'll do for me.

And testing 650b wheels 3 years ago affects them missing their window for their wheel order in what way ?

Wrong. They were testing 650b three years ago.

So they tested them 3 yrs ago and decided to stay with 26" on their bigger bikes. This must say something about the "massive" increase in performance they found 27.7" to give, pretty much F all for the average rider.

I can't understand why people are getting so uptight about wheel size. If you're happy with your bike then ride it. If not get another and ride that one. It's not hard.

And secondly marketing is marketing. There's nothing to say you have to be sucked into buying every time something new comes out.

ianv - Member

JCL
Wrong. They were testing 650b three years ago.

So they tested them 3 yrs ago and decided to stay with 26" on their bigger bikes. This must say something about the "massive" increase in performance they found 27.7" to give, pretty much F all for the average rider.

No. No, you don't understand, JCL knows better -it is so apparent

I worry that sane people who don't care are under-represented on these threads.

I have a 26er and a 29er and am not especially RaD. I prefer the 29er for everything, but I'm not sure the wheel size is the main reason.

Fair point.

I have a 26er and a 29er and am not especially RaD. I prefer the 26er for everything, but I'm not sure the wheel size is the main reason. 🙂

I don't have a problem with 650b being about the industry marketing a new product to basically make them more money because mountain bike technology has effectively stalled for them and 29er is a no go, at least this side of the pond.

26 may be dead in terms of new complete bikes from the big names, but doesn't make it dead on the trails. Out of a range of 50+ people I've ridden with in the last year, there are 3 or 4 at the most I can think of with 650b. More with 29, but the rest are 26. Some considering 650b if they're changing bikes and few if any think they need to rush out to sell their 26 bikes in case they spontaneously combust because it's 26.

Myself, and probably like a lot of people, having more than one 26 bike and lots of tyres I'm not about to go 650b because I want to keep all my kit the same 'platform' so I can swap things about and have spares so I have one bike I can ride at least if the other is out of action. Changing to 650b means changing two frames and sets of wheels & forks. Not going to happen any time soon.

When I'm done with them though I'll buy what's on the market and if that's 650b then so be it. Makes no difference to me in the riding.

What does get me however is the marketing BS.

Love this bit from Giant - http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-gb/technology/tech27-5/94/

So "27.5" is better because it's lighter... except only to 29ers
It rolls better... but less so than 29ers, so not really the best.
It accelerates faster... than a 29er, but a 26 would be better.
Better traction than a 26, fair enough... but a 29 would be better.
It has a stiffer frame... than a 29, but a 26 would be even better.

So yeah, it's neither one or the other, so obviously the only choice is to offer the middle which is not best at anything 😉

Plus of those "benefits" the rolling and traction can be dealt with by tyre choice instead of changing frame.

Seems to me there's a market surely for those who want the best of one or the other end or just what suits them best. Though I can understand a big company wanting to cut out the stuff that probably won't sell so well for them.

So they tested them 3 yrs ago and decided to stay with 26" on their bigger bikes. This must say something about the "massive" increase in performance they found 27.7" to give, pretty much F all for the average rider.

Their position has always been that 26" is great, 29" is great and different enough to exist alongside 26". 650b doesn't offer much over 26" and doesn't do what a 29" does so what's the point? They've got tons of cash and the best R&D and could have easily gone 650b but didn't. I think they deserve credit for their stance on it. If Trek (who sort of did), and Giant did the same 650b may have fallen on it's ass.

However, they'll have no choice but to go 650bs now when 26" fork/rim/tyre options dry up.

That Giant marketing stuff above was very convincing..........in making me want a 26 " bike. Now where could I find one of those.

Plus of those "benefits" the rolling and traction can be dealt with by tyre choice instead of changing frame.

This point seems to be often overlooked, but is a very good one. I recently built up a 29er. Having read about the "massive" improvements in traction and being concerned about weight, I went down to a lighter tyre and slipped (and crashed) all over the place, before going back to my usual tyres. There may be a slight increase in traction with the larger wheel (although I've not noticed it yet) but since it is less than the difference between two tyres from the same company it is largely irrelevant. I could get more traction (with less of a weight penalty) by putting a stickier tyre on my 26" bike.

Not that I'm against 29ers, but the traction issue is a bit of a red herring in my opinion.

What that video says to me is that the bike industry big players do collude and force the rest of the market. People poo-poo the idea of this as 'conspiracy theory', but it's not unusual in unregulated markets. Even the price of iron ore is still mostly set this way IIRC.
AT some point, 29" started to become more popular. Then the price of materials form the far East started to go up and a global economic downturn put off the consumer. So heavy, heavy marketing on the 29er seemed like a good idea to rejuvenate sales and secure profits. 29ers are also ideal as the wheels are fairly obviously different, so the consumer can 'set themselves apart' on the trail by having the 'latest wheelsize'. However, this didn't work quite well enough (small people like me for example will never by 29") so they have decided that to ensure they can still pay dividends to shareholders, they will have to market 650b as the 'one true size' and kill off 26" and the associated 2nd hand market. One of the reasons 26" has to go is that it's not that easy to tell the bikes apart, so for this to work, 26" simply has to 'go away'. The prime example is Boardman, who always says that they take 2 years to release a new bike so they 'can really use all that R&D'. However, he is quoted in Bike Magic in July 2012 that he'll 'never go 650b'. So clearly, there was no 650b being developed by Boardman less than a year ago. 2 weeks ago, he releases an 'only 650b' MTB range. So, all the 'maths and research' that was pointing to 29" last year and the year before is apparently suddenly pointing to 650b. Yeah, right.
That's not to say that the different wheel sizes don't make great bikes - just that the market is being forced. It will be very tricky though. 'New' people and youngsters coming into MTB buy a lot of new bikes, as do people with disposable income and those who 'must have' the latest thing. They can be sold whatever in the shops. But there's a solid hard core that remain avid MTBers for longer. If I remember correctly, the polls show that most people on here have a standard 1 1/8th headtube still. So there will still be a strong, genuine, consumer demand for 26" that will be hard to ignore.

Not that I'm against 29ers, but the traction issue is a bit of a red herring in my opinion.

The difference in rolling isn't though. I have to admit I was amazed at the difference, having been quite sceptical.

being concerned about weight, I went down to a lighter tyre and slipped (and crashed) all over the place

Got a 650 hardtail, and it seems to work well, putting the bike along side a 29 er and a 26 er, aesthetically it looks right!! The 29er wheeled bike looks slightly odd, the 26 er wheeled bike look too small in comparison.
The running gear on the 650 is identical from a Cotic Soul (9 speed , 32 front) and it does outclimb the Cotic, however it may not be wheel size but frame geometry that provides the difference ( longer front centre, longer seat stays) but it is a slacker angle bike.
It does not seem to stall in Mud holes quite so much as the 26 er hardtail but its very subjective.

The difference in rolling isn't though.

I'd agree with you, in principle. All things being equal a larger wheel will roll over obstacles more easily and the difference is noticeable. However, all things are rarely equal in practice. A 29er often has a steeper head angle and less travel than a comparable 26" bike, which reduces the advantages to the point where they become hard to detect.

If I'm trying to ride through a rock garden I find that my 140mm, 67 degree 26" bike seems to roll just as well as my 120mm, 70 degree 29er (and is easier to change line if I need to). Which one is best probably just comes down to how the suspension is set up. Of course a 140mm, 67 degree 29er would roll through better than either of them, but would be a bit of a tanker.

That's the problem with a lot of 29ers on the market, in my opinion. In trying to address some of the criticisms of the earlier 29ers (e.g. slower steering) they've engineered out all of the advantages. I don't want a 29er that "rides just like a 26 inch bike". I already have a 26" bike.

The running gear on the 650 is identical from a Cotic Soul (9 speed , 32 front) and it does outclimb the Cotic, however it may not be wheel size but frame geometry that provides the difference

I recently built up one of the last of the 26" Fives and it's made me realise just how pointless most of the discussions about wheel size (and suspension designs for that matter) really are. All that really matters is geometry. If you can get that right and make a bike that feels as perfectly balanced as my Five I don't care what size wheels you've used.

All things being equal a larger wheel will roll over obstacles more easily and the difference is noticeable. However, all things are rarely equal in practice. A 29er often has a steeper head angle and less travel than a comparable 26" bike, which reduces the advantages to the point where they become hard to detect.

Well I'm making the comparison on two machines both with zero suspension travel and zero (90?) degree head angle, so having removed other variables the difference is immediately apparent - to the point I can get up the same climbs in the same gear ratio on the 29er as I could on the 26er.

ive just got a 153/160mm 650ber

its rides brilliantly but no idea if thats to do with wheelsize, been riding a 2008 bike for the last few years so shorter chainstays, stiffer rear end-beefier pivots, better suspension, slacker headangle, type 2 mech, sexy paintjob 😉 all these things make it very hard to isolate any one feature making it so great

I dont think giant need to worry about convincing people to go 650b, the decisions already been made itll just take a while, nichemongers aside im pretty sure 26ers will be supermarket only in a few years, not to say that 26ers will die, cant imagine ill ever stop riding my steel lava dome!

Well I'm making the comparison on two machines both with zero suspension travel and zero (90?) degree head angle, so having removed other variables the difference is immediately apparent - to the point I can get up the same climbs in the same gear ratio on the 29er as I could on the 26er.

I doubt you've really got a 90 degree head angle. That would be pretty hard to ride. Something around 72 degrees is standard for a (rigid) road bike. But I agree with you. Take suspension out of the equation and the advantages of a larger wheel on rough ground become pretty obvious.

Bringing it back on topic, this is what confused me about the comments from the Trekette* She seemed to be saying that 650b only has an advantage over 26" for longer travel, which seems counter-intuitive to me. I would expect the advantages of the slightly larger wheel (if you could detect them at all) to be most apparent with less (or no) suspension. Even the suspension offered by the tyres confuses the issue as the bike that rolls better may just be the one with the optimum tyre pressure for the terrain. Once you put a lot of suspension into the mix I'd need a lot of convincing that you weren't just seeing the effect of any slight differences in the setup of the suspension rather than the wheel.

* Is that better than "Trek lady" 🙂

Well killing 26 means those manufacturers have excluded me as potential customer. Given the amount of kit I have I have no interest in a different wheel size. The industry has lost a lot of credibility with the aggressive 29er marketing. I actually ride my local trails on a hard tail to make them more challenging and thus interesting and I was never going to take a 29er to the Alps. The last thing I need is a trail bike which takes the fun out of riding.

Anybody who really feels confident predicting the death of high end 26" trail bikes should really be turning their attention to next week's lottery numbers. We're less than a year into the latest marketing experiment. If 650b delivers the increase in sales that the marketing department predicted then it may stick, but if it looks as though there is more money to be made from 26" bikes you can bet that they'll jump back on those just as quick.

Of course they have to talk about the death of 26" bikes. The biggest deterrent to somebody buying a 650b bike now must be the fear that it is just a passing fad, so you have to create the illusion that you are really committed to this new size.

Of course they have to talk about the death of 26" bikes. The biggest deterrent to somebody buying a 650b bike now must be the fear that it is just a passing fad, so you have to create the illusion that you are really committed to this new size.

really ? my new 650b bike should last a good few years so if in 2017 or whenever its time for a new bike ill just want the best bike I can get whetehr it will have 26inch wheels or 27.5 doesnt really bother me!

OK, I was forgetting that some people buy a bike and ride it in its "stock" form until it breaks. Fair enough; such [s]wierdos[/s] people have nothing to fear 🙂 But those who may want to upgrade wheels, forks etc in a year or two will want to know that they'll be able to get the parts.

Judging from these threads it looks as though some people are buying 650b bikes because they are concerned about the availability of 26" spare parts, which is a wonderful piece of circular logic.

"size doesn't matter" 🙂

well its the first time ive ever bought a complete bike, always frames previously

the only issues are forks tyres and wheels

and it was a sticking point but my current stock of semi worn/shagged tyres will get used on my hardtail, ive got a set of hope hubs ill get built up when i find some nice 650b rims (existing front wheel is tacod)

so that just leaves forks and while i love my 44rc3tis 1 ride on the new pikes and I couldnt give a monkeys!

will prob work out a bit more expensive and more hassle to have done it this way but ive already got a buyer for my old forks and everything else is transferable or sellable

I think Garth nicely illustrates the real problem here

OK, I was forgetting that some people buy a bike and ride it in its "stock" form until it breaks.

This is me.

I read a good review, weigh up whether i think its worth the price or not, shop around to see if i can get it cheaper elsewhere, see how much i already have on my credit card and then buy said bike....i then chop and change a few personal things so it 'fits' me....bars, stem, saddle etc etc.....ride it until it breaks or until i sell it on....then repeat.

It will be a few years yet until i buy another complete bike as i just bought one this year therefore it doesnt matter to me what is happening with wheels sizes....when i come to change again (likely next year after moving house) i'll just pick what is best for me at the time.

I suspect people like me make up the bulk of the buying public and most people dont swap their forks, wheels etc year in and year out.

650b is being pushed at those of an insecure mindset who feel they are missing out if they dont have one in the shed....likewise the scaremongering about parts availability conveniently ignores market laws about demand....if there is demand for 26 inch parts then some enterprising firm will make said parts and make money from the demand.

I cant decide whether these threads are boring or funny but i am strangely drawn to them anyway....i particularly like the industry PR being spouted at the moment, it really is good for a chuckle every few days.

The best way to explain my indifference to the wheels size debate is to highlight that mountain biking is my hobby, the bike is merely the tool used to carry out the activity.
By and large it doesnt matter what i'm riding, its the quality of my riding and the trails i'm on that make up a good ride for me....as long as the bike doesnt break and i have confidence in its ability to take a hammering under my 15st weight then i'm happy, i dont sit in the garage stroking the bike and staring at it.

I also play squash, my racquet is a few years old, a bit heavy, has loads of cosmetic chips etc....but it doesnt detract from my love of the game, would a better racquet make me a better player?...nope, losing weight and getting fitter would do though!
Its far too easy to get hung up on just buying things in the mistaken belief that they are better or will make you better....i doubt i'd be any quicker downhill on Gee Atherton's bike than on my own despite the colossal price difference.

I doubt you've really got a 90 degree head angle.

Well I suppose as they don't have a headset they don't strictly speaking have a head angle, but the steering axis is certainly 90 (0?) degrees.

stop teasing, aracer 😀

But it's such fun, scaredypants!

The last thing I need is a trail bike which takes the fun out of riding.

Riding a bike takes the fun out of riding? ❓

All this 27.5 marketing stuff is rather annoying, but we are seeing some nice bikes coming out based around 27.5 and more aggressive geometries. I'm still going to buy a Cotic Rocket as it's supposed to be a really fun frame, but if I was after a 27.5 bike I'd definitely be interested in a Kona Process 153 or a Yeti SB 75.

process 153 is the one makes 26ers look pointless heres mine next to a 26er for comparison

[img] [/img]

I think we going to see more forks like X fusion.
Ones that can be adjusted from 26" to 27.5"
Or maybe even 29" forks adjusted down to 27.5!

I never really been interested in riding a 29" because of the type of RIDING I DO! 😯
BUT I do think 29" does suit some people on height and type of riding they do. as the vid said people should try the bike first and then make there own mind up.

I am interested in the trying a few 27.5" if I do like them all I need to need to do is get a new wheel set all other kit can transfer over!

kimbers - Member

process 153 is the one makes 26ers look pointless heres mine next to a 26er for comparison

Both are made to look tiny by your +7 Bookshelves of Nerd though.

Wait, not in alphabetical order? Your opinion is invalid.

Bugger off you crusty 650b evangelist.
The best bit about that bike is the colour, sod the wheel size

graham, youll be on the big wheels soon... ps BPW in dec!?!?

Northwind, my 1 year old son takes great pleasure in clearing the lower shelves for me on a daily basis but they were once arranged by genre/ thematically
also, out of shot I spaced the upper shelves so they are exactly the right size for graphic novels and RPG sourcebooks !!

Yeah right......
Got 4 bikes with 26" wheels, and until they all die then 26" it will be.

Def BPW, just let me know the date.

[b]rOcKeTdOg[/b] - Member
Riding a bike takes the fun out of riding?

One thing that bugs me about new standards, "x" brand is saying after extensive testing the new size is better than the older ones, then a year later they have another new size that's slightly larger or smaller and better than all of the previous ones (including the one that's not long been out)... Surely all that testing they did with the previous revision should have included the new size they've just released!.

I can understand when improved technologies or materials open up change to improve something, but when it's slightly different why didn't they come to that conclusion the first or second time round, not the tenth.

Obviously we all know why it works that way, but it still annoys me. I'm happy with newer and shinyer until something is worth changing for an improvement, wheel size choices are fair enough as people can make their own mind up, but to say something is dead after an industry having an overnight revelation then preaching it like some extremist bike based cult is irritating.

I've ordered a 29er, simply because I want something different to my 26 hardtail and full sus. I'll ride whichever bike is going to be most fun for where i'm riding.

From Giants 2014 catalogue - 'Arguably the most important benefit of 27.5 over 29 is quicker acceleration. This is the "snap" that a rider feels when they push hard on the pedals. It is affected not just by overall static weight but also where the weight is distributed throughout the wheel. The farther the weight is from the center of the hub, the slower the acceleration. So a similarly constructed 1000-gram 29-inch wheel is slower to accelerate than a 1000-gram 26-inch wheel—because the larger diameter rim and longer spokes place weight farther from the hub. The key to snappy acceleration is minimizing the weight of the outermost components (rim, nipples, spokes, tire, tube). As you can see, a 27.5-inch wheel is only 1.5% slower to accelerate than a similarly constructed 26-inch wheel, but a 29-inch wheel is 3.6% slower than a similarly constructed 26-inch wheel.'

Having owned and ridden 29ers,this is one of the reasons why I got rid of them. I keep posting over the years gone by on why I can't see the point in me riding this wheelsize when,like I continue to point out,yet get told by these companies that the bigger wheel climbs better and faster,only to be told that they've done their testing to agree with me all along.. the riding I do up here,lets say over a 4 hour mountain ride,consists of approx 3.5 hours of climbing, the remainder descending. I have noticed on all the 29ers how slow and awful they are on climbs compared to the equivalent bike sporting the 26 inch wheel. I was really feeling like I was imagining things over the years as nobody seemed to agree. Most still don't. Yet Giant have done the math to keep me a little more sane. How anybody can ride ANY 29er and honestly feel it better on climbs over the acceleration of a 26er baffles me. Maybe it's because once you're onto a 29er you forget about what the 26 once climbed like. Or maybe the 29er they've moved onto has a more efficient design in it's suspension.. who knows. All I know is that whether its fully rigid 29er,front suspension only, or fully suspended with 29, they all climb nowhere near any of the 26 inch wheeled bikes I've owned or ridden.

Now I know most of you would disagree on the above. This is just something I feel each time I ride 29ers. I can't change what I feel on each bike on the climbs. As far as 650 goes, during a recent test of a Giant trance I felt it sluggish on the climbs over my 26er but definitely more my cup of tea as far as spinning the wheels up to speed goes. Considering that they are closer to 26 in size, I was quite impressed with the stability at speed of the wheelsize considering the small increase over 26.

Anyhows, I'll be back in a minute with a few images that will make you cringe..

To Giant,or any other brands out there that are trying to, or are planning on getting their message across on what's going down in the lab as far as testing goes.. do not,repeat DO NOT draw around random spherical objects found around the office to make up your own take on wheel diameters. You can try and fool people by making up your own off-scale wheel diagrams to accentuate contact patch lengths along with angles of attack, but sooner or later someone will notice. Go back to the drawing board for 2015 (but find new objects around the office) and try and convince us with the truth. A good start would be drawing the 650 wheel to scale on par with the 26. THEN add in your contact patch lengths and attack angles to show how great it all is.

[url= http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7377/10547756423_24fb6f56fc_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7377/10547756423_24fb6f56fc_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/65460103@N08/10547756423/ ]giant contact patch image[/url]

[url= http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3802/10547206774_3d254681f5_z.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3802/10547206774_3d254681f5_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/65460103@N08/10547206774/ ]angle of attack[/url]

In our local race series there is a guy who on a good I can keep within sight if he's riding his 26" but if he's on his 29" he's gone. It's happened a dozen times. Acceleration isn't the key to going consistently fast, it's maintaining speed. That's where the lower rolling resistance comes in.

If you're talking smooth climbs with loads of traction yeah I agree, a 26" might even be quicker than a 29" but technical climbing? Not even close. I can ride the 29" up stuff I hadn't a hope of getting up on the 26" and I don't even have to take the best line. You can ride like a goon and still get up stuff.

Not dissing 26" in the slightest BTW. If you don't care about going as fast as possible a 26" is probably more fun than a 29" I'm talking the best examples of each size of course.

Of course a 140mm, 67 degree 29er would roll through better than either of them, but would be a bit of a tanker.

You get used to it. And then there is no going back! 🙂

Of course a 140mm, 67 degree 29er would roll through better than either of them, but would be a bit of a tanker.

One thing that came up a while ago was the other great reason for 650b - you can come back from 29" without admitting you were wrong 🙂