Chris Porter is entertaining.

A little interaction I had with him some (many) years ago when the paint/coating on my Fox talas was bubbling & fell off within the space of a week:

CP “people like you always moan about the look of thing and ignore the function” (having never met me or spoken to me before).
Me “eh? I look after my stuff and ignoring how something functions, the way it looks is important to me”

CP “it doesn’t matter how something looks, it’s the functions that counts”

Me “how can I trust the product if a fundamental part is well below standard? How do I know that it’s been put together right when they can’t even coat the things right?”

CP “people like you always say things like that. Why don’t you just go out and ride the things instead of polishing it?”

Me “you’ve never met me; I’d love to ride my brand new bike but all the paint just fell off the forks, which I don’t think is right, given its a week old”

CP “so, what you going to do, paste this conversation all over the Internet? People like you (again – never met me) shouldn’t have bikes; they’re functional things and it doesn’t matter what they look like.”

Me “just fix the **** forks”

CP “click…..”

The man is a ****.

Good watch that.
Basically confirms what I’ve always wanted. A short travel (110-120 rear) 29fs would be my perfect race (enduro) bike. Unfortunately I (like most) cannot afford a race bike and so use my all round race bike/trail bike/fun bike for enduro race duties. It’s slower, and I know that, but it’s more fun and versatile (well in a fun kind of way)

And I’m glad that 650+ didn’t do too well. To me, it seems an in between, average, excel at nothing kind of bike. For the man that needs n+1. I’m glad because I don’t want to change 🙂

I think the key phrase on the b+ judgement was “not competitive”. Under a world class rider racing for time down a black run, they offered no advantages.

I ran b+ on my 29er HT through the winter, it was a great way to add a little float to a stiff frame, smooths out trailcrap on the climbs and roots on the descents. I think it was faster, but if it wasn’t, it was still “nicer”.

I’ve yet to ride a b+FS so the jury’s out on that one for me.

And one of my mates runs a 29+ Stache, he adores it and is anything but slow.

He thinks the wheels are too flexy (he’s right – they are flexier for the same spec and build quality) and that you can’t “pump” them through terrain (he’s right-ish, you can pump them but it requires bigger undulations in the trails).

He also thinks that big wheels make suspension performance worse.
http://www.mbr.co.uk/news/bike_news/size-matters-part-3-bicycle-geometry-sucks-324160

Great video and getting 100+ runs in over that range of riders is a great base.
Overall T-Mo nails it, pick waht you like and what works for you. Myself I’ve got an XC 29r, trail/Enduro 26 and a DH bike. Next bike to be replaced is the trail/enduro bike – no idea what wheels it will have.

On the + stuff, I think the telling thing is regardless of benefits the rubber isn’t good enough for riding tough trails. To only get 3 completed runs in says a lot and why I’ve got no interest in them at the moment. In terms of grip if I can make my 29×2.2″ Ardent races grip when I need them and my 26×2.4″ Minions grab the trail “extra grip” at the expense of more weight and less resilience seems pointless.

They could just have put the straws he was clutching for a bit closer. His world seems very black and white whereas the real world is many shades of grey with there being no absolutely correct answer.

So the + size tyres needed more reinforcement in the sidewalls but that would result in wheels that would be too heavy. Sounds like you could have many of the benefits of + size tyres with less of a weight penalty if you reduced the diameter of the rim.

If only there was a solution. A smaller diameter rim perhaps.