Forum menu
It has settled down here, going into 5th year on 29"
Gary Fisher Introduced 29ers in 2004 IIRC, and 650B isn't that much newer, they've both just gained popularity lately.
Been exclusively 29 for about six years... For me, where I ride, and my size, it's perfect.
Looking back at all the nay saying, it's really quite amusing. I think the functionality won over a really significant public perception (hate) hurdle.
But today, ladies and gentlemen, I present to you.... The future.....
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Remarkable stuff..
The larger gap between 27.5 and 29er is evident when tires are installed. Shown here are, left to right, Michelin Wild Race'r 26x2.1 - Pacenti Neo-Moto 650Bx2.1 - WTB Nano 29x2.1
Not picking on you dan, just a comment that sums up many rider's feelings - I think most brands genuinely are trying to make better bikes, it's simple competition. Some try stuff without understanding, but not many. Norco as matt mentioned - I heard they discussed 650B as a must-do, then realised no-one really knew how they rode. So they rode them. And loved them. So they made them. That's how it tends to work at good bike companies. The ones that make bikes that ride poorly are probably the trend-jumpers. Sometimes bigger companies need things to get to a certain level of exposure to justify the time, try them and like them, like the garage tinkerers got into 29 or 650b in the first place.Brands are all trying to stand out and create an imaginary problem using standard marketing methods.
To me, added tyre volume is a great thing. You can use bigger rims and tyres, but bigger diameter adds more again. The roll-over thing plus volume helps you go faster in more control. If it's at the expense of handling that's no good, but that happens less now that most brands understand 29er geometry better (unless you really need to throw the bike around, DJ / 4X etc).
So on my 26" bike, 650B could replace 26" - it's only a bit bigger so it may be just a 'slightly improved 26"' feel. 29" is very different and that's a good thing, lets designers give a bike a different feel or character. So 29" is a stayer. No one size is 'best', but of the 3, I expect one to fade away. The industry doesn't want the complex message of 3 wheel sizes. Much depends on what happens in DH/slopestyle stuff where the marketing is so important to the big brands. I can't see a whole field at crankworks on 650B but DH, well maybe. Perhaps it'll force a rethink of hub widths for wheel stiffness / strength, then we're onto a whole new standards debate ) Or, 650B will just be too middling for many and we'll prefer to go to one extreme or the other.
Charlie, that % angle of attack diagram is good huh. The difference is so samll in numbers that you'd almost dismiss it vs all the other gains like weight. Yet on the bike it's a very noticeable difference. Makes me wonder how much is larger wheel momentum and added volume (squish effect) added to the angle-of-attack thing. I'm not as into the physics as riding by feel so I buy into the big wheels in many areas because they do roll well.
The wheel size debate will settle down when the marketing asshats decide on yet another new "standard" to pursue.
/cynic
Interesting pics Charlie. Im hoping to get some test rides in, as TBH I more tempted by the 29er, to have somthing different to ride in the garage, not better just different.
I have to say that angle of incidence diagram just makes me wonder even more why all the fuss over 650b at the minute?
surely the fools that buy into it will end up either wishing they'd bought a marginally better rolling 29er or a marginally better handling 26er and their middle for diddle tyres are bound to end up costing them more than the other two otions for no real advantage....
Nah newer ain't always better.
Great post Jameso