Forum menu
It's just boys and toys isn't it?
The next 'big thing' comes along and the previous 'big thing' is forgotten.
In all honesty a dual ring plus 7/8 speed cassette would still be more than adequate for the majority of riders, and just look at the price you can pick this stuff up for. But no, because all the mags push 10/11 speed, that's what everyone wants. The brands then seek to make their old stuff obsolete by discontinuing it and forcing people to upgrade.
I'm not saying that this is 'wrong' per se, but if you just read between the lines a bit with all this 'must-have' crap, you can enjoy riding a mountain bike without breaking the bank on new bits all the time (speaking as someone who gets stuff delivered to work so the missus doesn't see it :oops:).
You have to consider practicality too. I would never spend more than absolutely necessary on a rear mech. You can pay over a hundred quid if you like, but the fact is it Is still something that hangs off the side of a mountain bike wheel. Sooner or later it is going to get twotted on a rock, tree stump, badger etc.
I've actually got quite a lot of respect for Steve Jones' opinions. Most of what he says, as a fast, aggressive rider that has ridden lots of bikes, is true. He might not have the most eloquent writing style but the core of what he says is true. I used to have two 26" bikes, now I've got two 27.5" bikes. Why? Because they're faster and feel no different once you've spent a couple of hours on one. The manual balance point and time difference when you tip them into a corner is slight, so it takes a few hours to get used to, but once you have, it feels identical to 26" (no bad thing), but slightly faster rolling and smoother over rough trails.
Just my 2 pence.
Wheel size debate = pseudo cock size debate.
Mine's smaller than yours.
Gotcha now mike. Agreed.
No, no, no, mine is definitely smaller. But I pride myself I know how to use it, mind! 😉
ttp://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/650b-spicy-conclusively-faster-says-nico
Where as Fabien Barrel thinks 26 inch bikes are faster.
Where were the 650bs and 29ers on a track that was meant to suit them? 
Apparently the new bike is one second faster over a 2min 50sec run. Which I work out as around 0.35%.
I wonder if he checked that the difference was statistically significant to a 95 percent confidence level.
The first 650b review I read was in ST mag, by Benji I think.
Yep. Spooky Horror Taxi?
He might not have the most eloquent writing style but the core of what he says is true
That may be true, but he earns his living as a [b]journalist[/b]. All the enthusiasm and technical knowledge in the world is of no use in journalism if you can't write coherent English, or at least English that can be sub-edited into coherence. It consistently appears (having read Dirt on and off over the last few years) that this is something Jones is utterly incapable of doing.
I find jones writing style entertaining and sort is still the best mag out there IMHO
As for nico having stastisically analysed his times TomW how many world cup overalls do you have ? - I'll take his word over yours
I find jones writing style entertaining and dirt is still the best mag out there IMHO
As for nico having stastisically analysed his times TomW how many world cup overalls do you have ? - I'll take his word over yours
I think the issue of whether wheel size x or y is faster is almost a moot point. For many people, the issue is more about not having a spare 2 grand lying around to replace frame, fork, wheels and tyres for the benefit of going a bit faster.
I think a lot of magazines and Dirt in particular have lost the plot a bit in terms of what constitutes a reasonable amount of money to pay for bike parts when you might only get to ride them once a week.
It's almost as if someone wants you to buy a complete new bike, not just a new fork, or wheels, or frame, or other peace-meal upgrade/replacement this year...
That video is well worth watching all the way through by the way.
I'm obviously a sucker because I bought a 650b bike new rather than a frame as I normally would coz of the wheel size compatibility issues
But you know what I don't care coz its solo much better than my old bike (it's even fully endorsed by Steve Jones)
The bike industry have done themselves a lot of damage with the way they've handled 650b. A new standard to choose from is ok. To try and force all your customers' installed base into obsolescence by refusing to support it, comes across as manipulation.
There's something desperate about the way they've gone about it which seems different this time about all the other innovations we've had.
Kimbers - The new one would be better than your old one if it had a basket on the front.
graham stop complaining and come to cwmcarn next weekend
Didn't know you were going and just over a week before the wedding is a really bad plan
jones' boner for anything other than 26" is getting properly annoying now. He could be heard dismissing pagey's answers as they were coming out of his mouth with his groans and sighs.
Tom_W1987 - Member
thing is though, the bigger wheel is faster, you can argue it isn't until you run out of places to buy 26" stuff but in the end they are.
time to join the 21st century guys*
*if any bike company is out there looking for new staff, see i am ace at this marketing bullshit thing, employ me!
Data please, pinkbike ran a test that seemed to show they were slower on the downs. Is the tiny difference in wheel size worth the loss of travel many of the 650b dh bikes are seeing?
Well, I could make some up if you like!
You do get irony yes?
Clementz is on the proto 27.5" Jekyll in the Andes Pacifico Enduro this week. He got overtaken for the lead by Francois Bailly-Maitre on his 29" BMC TF01 today...
Wheelsize battles everywhere!
A cynical person might suggest the industry realised that short arses were never going to buy 29ers because they looked odd on them with negative rise stems and the like so they got a middle ground to sell a new wheelsize now need everyone on board to get the punters to part with cash.
Jonesy's going to be creaming himself at this...
[img] 
[/img]
Brook McDonald's proto Session in 650b
Credit it where it's due to MBR on 29ers mind, they owned up to getting it wrong
Wait, what? Are 29ers no good now then? What was MBR's original position?
As a matter of fact, the Internet Wheelsize Resistance is the main reason I am curious to try a 650b bike.
It's a bit like gay sex in that respect: denouncing it so loudly only makes people curious.
🙂
Only a valid comparison if women are to be phased out. 😀
Even Giant aren't that arrogant.
What a fool!
Has he got some off his own money in 27.5??
Rusty Spanner - Member
Not one negative comment published regarding the way that 650b has been forced onto the market?
Not even one?And you don't find that surprising?
Forced onto the market? Seriously? 650B bikes were in the American press years ago, before 29ers, IIRC, but the real irony here, with all you lot ranting about it like it's some fancy new tech, is that I was riding a 650B, or 27" bike, with riser bars and knobbly tyres, around my local woods and lanes forty bloody years ago! If it wasn't for the Americans developing downhill bikes from clunky old fat-tyres Schwinn cruisers, everyone would be using 650B and think nothing of it, it was the industry standard wheel size for any adult bike in the UK, and the European touring wheel, 700C being the racing wheel size.
700C/29er is hopelessly inappropriate for a mountain bike, unless you're a really lanky git; I'm 6", and could never get on with 29ers, whereas 650B is perfect, that little extra circumference allowing the tyre to roll more easily over rough surfaces. Which is why the Moulton ATB with 20" wheels never caught on, too susceptible to being baulked by roots, rocks, gullies...
Believe me, if it was possible to fit a 650B wheel and tyre on my Inbreds I would have done it years ago.
Sod fashion, it's something that makes perfect sense for a bike being ridden by an average size human adult.
And suitable for women, too.
Here you go, a 1961 British mountain bike, when fitted with Avon cyclo-cross tyres:
[URL= http://i834.photobucket.com/albums/zz266/robertjohnkay/027.jp g" target="_blank">
http://i834.photobucket.com/albums/zz266/robertjohnkay/027.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
Until WC season I pretend dirt doesn't exist.
The opinions contained within mean nowt to me, utter glossy waffle.
CZis right of course.
I well remember when all of the 650b bikes were withdrawn in favour of 26ers, leaving a dissolutioned user base of millions of happy 650b riders......
Oh, hang on.
You don't think 650b has beed forced onto the market?
I don't believe you.
😀
Wait til they get a leg over the 650b Trek session and RAD rear shock.
Jonesys pants will explode.
[img] 
[/img]
What I find funny about all this '27.5 is betterer than 26' guff is that there aren't that many truly bad bikes out there in either. My 1st MTB was my dad's old tourer with 27x1 3/8th" cross tyres, a quill stem from my Raleigh burner and some cow-horn handlebars. To finish it off I took off the mudguards and rack & got a right belting off my dad..!
I had loads of fun on it - it was a wheely monster and skidded ace.
It didn't matter what size the wheels were - I used what it had fitted and still had a laugh. This is what a lot of people have forgotten - it's about having fun. There aren't many on here who will benefit from a seconds advantage over 1-3 minutes. Hell, if I lost half a stone I'd smash all over any wheel size advantage, but to what ends? I'm still having fun so it really doesn't matter.
I propose that given the bike industry is so fickle, my 36" waist is far better than my old 34" waist, which pissed all over my previous 32"..! Clearly the 36" version is rounder and more shock absorbing, and if I pull a funny move in the mirror without clothes on, I certainly look more teardrop shaped for aerodynamics (only if you blur your eyes and squint a bit).
So here it is 36" waists are 116% better than a 650b wheelset. If you wanna kick the arse of Gwin,
Atherton et al... Eat more pie and chips!
You don't think 650b has beed forced onto the market?
I don't believe you.
I really don't give a shit whether you do or not. Mountain biking has been 'forced onto the market' right from the beginning, around 1982, and it's arguable that pretty much every single development has been 'forced onto the market', if you look back at magazine articles from the 1980's.
Speaking from the point of view of someone who was doing exactly what Mildred describes, only it was my first grown-up bike, (I was eleven...), and then getting my first mountain bike in 1988, a red and white Stumpjumper, I think I can honestly say I've seen every new development touted as the next greatest thing, so all this bleating about the re-introduction of a wheel size that was almost universal for adult bikes forty years ago is just a load of bollocks.
Change happens, journo's write hyperbole about it, get over it.
I don't agree.
We have had the choice of buying a well specced 26 inch bike removed.
The manufacturers have replaced the vast majority with 650b bikes.
That's what I mean by forced onto the market.
Manufacturers didn't suddenly withdraw all road bikes when MTB's hit the market.
And I don't remember seeing many 650b road bikes in the 70's, unless as an alternative to 27inch bikes for shorter riders.
And I don't remember seeing many 650b road bikes in the 70's, unless as an alternative to 27inch bikes for shorter riders.
Isn't that 650C?
Very possibly.
I'm getting my b's and c's mixed up.
And I thought that 27inch wheels in the uk were a very different diameter to 650b?
I certainly have no recollection of 650b being the default UK size for British adult bikes - thought it was 27?
For everyone but racers, the question isn't "is 650b better"- it might be, it might not, but it's certainly not a big enough difference to justify replacing a quality 26 inch bike.
And there are other disadvantages for the consumer, companies have thrown effort into 650b that could have gone on improving other products- for example tyre companies have had to redesign and re-release their whole range just to stand still, the number of decent new designs in the last year or so are tiny. And despite that there's still less choice for 650b than there is for 26- there's just 1 halfdecent hard-use mud tyre, for instance, and even that's come after a winter of people making do with stuff you'd never choose if you had the choice of 26.
Shops have been stuck with artificially obsolete stock and the need to buy in new stock that is basically identical in order to sell it for the same amount.
molgrips - MemberWait, what? Are 29ers no good now then? What was MBR's original position?
Nah, for ages they said they were rubbish. Then something happened to make them change their minds. Jury's out on whether they just discovered they were wrong, or, it may have coincided with Specialized going all 29er 😉
Here you go, a 1961 British mountain bike, when fitted with Avon cyclo-cross tyres:
Wow, that's almost EXCATLY the same as a modern 650b MTB. Oh wait, I meant exactly not the same 🙂
It makes no difference that that size has been popular in the past on different bikes. Point is, it's 'new' for MTBs because for years 26 was the standard.
However the marketing is bollocks, of course it is - it's marketing. That's not even a debate 🙂
The choice could be a good thing but I'm quite concerned that 26 support is going to dwindle. I have four 26er bikes that used to be high end, there's no way I am going to replace them all. I don't want to replace any of them.
That's what I mean by forced onto the market.
Who really needs a 26er instead of 650b? The short, I suppose.
It makes sense. 27.5 is a good wheel size for the type of riding Dirt promotes.
supply and demand innit, same reason you struggle to get decent acid these days, whose gonna make it when all the kool kids are chomping that mcat stuff... o sorry wrong decade 8)
Terribly 2012 this. Inverse argument.