Well I’m bucking the trend and thinking of going back to a 26er for at least one bike

OK, I am really surprised. In my entirely unscientific poll on here, you are the first 29″ rider under about 6’silly”. I have long assumed that one had to be freakishly tall to even be able to get on one (no pun intended).

I’m 5’10” and ride a size large 29er, I still have a 26er which is a medium, and my previous 26er was also a medium. Work that one out?!? 😕

The myth that 29ers are only suitable for very tall riders is rubbish these days, perhaps 5yrs ago, but not now.

Just another option to choose, all good in my opinion as long you enjoy your riding.

Cheers chaps. That is a revelation. I had assumed that I’d never be able to get on one without a ladder. Bikes are all sorted now but maybe at the next change I’ll think about giving one a try out of curiosity.

Not sure how your large 29″ / medium 26″ works, Paceman! Had assumed it would be the other way round.

Do 29ers offer any advantages in terms of low speed manoeuvrability?

I have no interest in a bike that rolls faster as I can already go as fast as my nerves will let me. Where I struggle is on steep rough twisty stuff (up or diwn) where I need to move the bike around at walking pace. I would have thought that the bigger wheel would be harder to move around in those situations, but it would be good to hear from somebody who has tried.

I’m sure that some of you can get up or down this sort of stuff on your 29ers no problem. But that’s just because you has awesome skills. What I want to know is whether a 29er would be easier or harder to handle in those situations than a 26″ bike.

Cheers

Andy

What I want to know is whether a 29er would be easier or harder to handle in those situations than a 26″ bike.

I find it more stable, including at low speed. Wether you find that a plus or a minus is a judgement call I guess. I don’t have the best balance so it’s a plus for me when inching around a tight switchback.

Do 29ers offer any advantages in terms of low speed manoeuvrability? …. I would have thought that the bigger wheel would be harder to move around in those situations, but it would be good to hear from somebody who has tried.

My 2p on that (coffee break essay time sorry..) is a larger diameter / heavier wheel has more inertia so it feels a bit heavier to move from side to side at any speed, but compared to an average rider’s strength it’s not something I’d worry about – I got used to it pretty quick, and bar/stems can compensate in the same way people use 60mm stems and 750mm bars on slack 26″ bikes to offset the wheel flop.

A bigger wheel has less side-flop (ie the negative effect of a slack HA) for a given amount of trail too. So less flop means more balanced and neutral steering balance for the same stabilising effect of trail / castor effect. Fairly big plus for big wheels there imo.

A bigger wheel also tends to stall less against rocks or roots or can get over over stally obsatcles more smoothly, so on slower techier sections they can work really well. I’ve been suprised (and suprised others I ride with, who are all on 26″) by the steep, rocky-steppy roll-downs I can get away with on my rigid 29″ (due to rigid fork and BB relation to the axles as well as wheel size). I’ve rolled over edges half expecting to bail yet rode it out many times; I know a 26″ hardtail or my old rigid 26″ was or would’ve been harder for me to ride / avoid stalling on those sections.

Having said all that, a small wheel is always easier to move about and accelerate, it simply has less mass closer to the axle. For trail MTB riding I just don’t think it’s enough to balance out the bigger wheels’s positive effects unless you’re in the air much of the time, 4X racing for ex, or riding trials perhaps.

So some advantages and some disadvantages, for me it’s mainly advantages.

Others posting here have explained credibly why they like the sl-mo feel of the smaller wheel, so all I’m saying here is the +ves I find outweigh the -ves, ones they find or that I don’t experience.
(edit to add the standard disclaimer, all this is meaningless w/o considering the bike’s geometry – frames and fork design make way more difference to handling than wheel size alone)

Yeah that’s what I was going to say!

Not sure how your large 29″ / medium 26″ works, Paceman! Had assumed it would be the other way round.

I’ve gone from a medium Yeti 26er to a large Santa Cruz 29er. I demo’ed a medium and a large expecting the same outcome as you, but found the medium 29er a little small for me. It seems that although the wheels are bigger, other parts of the bike are not bigger, just designed to work with the bigger wheels.

I think some early 29ers may have been oversized 26ers which created this myth, i.e. frame geometry increased in size to cope with the larger wheel diameter, hence the reason they suited taller riders who found 26ers a bit cramped.

29er design has now evolved to solve this issue, but the ’29ers only suit tall riders’ stigma still exists for many.

NB: I also believed this until I did a demo ride.

Do 29ers offer any advantages in terms of low speed manoeuvrability? …. I would have thought that the bigger wheel would be harder to move around in those situations, but it would be good to hear from somebody who has tried.

Pro’s and con’s with a 29er in tight techy ups and downs in my experience. It definitely takes a change in technique to get the 29er round tighter corners, and you have to accept a slight loss in flow and acceleration because of this, but if the trail involves step ups, step downs, larger roots, rock gardens etc then the bigger wheels have the advantage of clearing those sections with more ease and stability. I’d agree with what Jameso said…

A bigger wheel tends to stall less against rocks or roots or can get over over stally obsatcles more smoothly, so on slower techier sections they can work really well. I’ve been suprised (and suprised others I ride with, who are all on 26″) by the steep, rocky-steppy roll-downs I can get away with on my rigid 29″ (due to rigid fork and BB relation to the axles as well as wheel size). I’ve rolled over edges half expecting to bail yet rode it out many times.

Difficult or near impossible to say if one wheel size is better overall than the other for low speed techy stuff in my opinion as it depends massively on the rider more than the bike. For me my 29er gives me much more confidence on steep techy terrain, but it wouldn’t stop me riding it on my 26er either, it would just be a different challenge in some ways.

Living in the south where we really don’t have any rocks the ability to get over the really rough stuff is mostly irrelevant, my riding tends to be twisty fiddly woodsy stuff. However, I did a night race around some woods last weekend and was irritated not only with my lack of skills (for which there is no cure) and fitness, but also that I was being thrown everywhere by little stumps and roots that I couldn’t see, to the point where they were at least disrupting any flow or even stopping me dead. Most frustrating especially when the racers just seemed to power past effortlessly (how do they do that?!).

Hmmm. Is this another “myth” in my head about to be exploded that a 26″ bike is far better at this sort of fiddly, niggly interrupty stuff?

Interesting observations. Thanks.

I was playing on the Black route at Balblair (Kyle of Sutherland MRB development, north of Inverness) yesterday and the rocky sections at the top were doing my head in. Think giant rocky egg box on a slope. The trickiest bits (for me) involved going down this steep rocky stuff with lots of wheel traps then making a turn and lifting the wheel up onto a boardwalk section (with intimidating drops if you got it wrong).

Now, I’m not going to buy a new bike just for this. I don’t ride up here that often and it is cheaper just to work on my skills. But I was thinking that all this emphasis on 29ers rolling faster is missing the point. If I wanted to smooth the trail out and go as fast as possible I’d just ride my road bike. A mountain bike (for me) is more about the ability to ride over ever more challenging terrain. I’d assumed that a bigger wheel would make those tight rocky sections even harder. But based on what you guys are saying, maybe that’s not the case. If it rolls over the egg box stuff and doesn’t get trapped in the dips maybe it would actually be easier.

Cheers

Andy

During last night’s ride we had a nice high speed convoy of XL Cotic Solaris (bright green) sandwiched between two M Cotic Souls (bright orange) down some very tight twisty singletrack. The Solaris owner spends less time in the air than us two Soul owners but up, down, along and round bends is on a par with the Souls (up being won by whoever is feeling fittest that day). It does look really right under him.

A 29er’s wheels are only 11% bigger than a 26er btw. My 26er’s wheels are 35% bigger than my BMX’s – that really feels vastly different!

@on1o – I’m down south too. IMO the ‘rollability’ of 29 isn’t about the larger obstacles, it’s about all the little tussocks, roots, flints, bumps and nodules we hit in say a typical mile of trail. Everyone of those knocks a little off momentum, and it’s dealing with those better that makes the ride smoother, slicker and faster on a 29.

@roverpig I think it’s a fair point that a 29, like suspension, is something of a skill compensator compared to a 26. It depends what you want of course. Or alternatively, if 29 is the baseline, smaller wheels are hazard accentuators, go as small as you dare!

roverpig – I was playing on some of the Balblair Black on my Fatbike a few weeks back (that’s not something I ever thought of) so I can see where you are coming from. I found that the larger wheel diameter (only 26″ but a 4″ tyre) was useful to help stop the wheel getting caught in some of those wee cracks and grooves. What I was missing was some suspension and a Dropper post! I reckon a 29er would be great there as you’d not lose so much momentum hitting those stepped bits.

Blimey, a fat bike over those rocks ! Respect. I was on the Five and still walked some bits. I guess I have only been riding off road for 8 months (after many years on the road) and am seriously short of bike handling skills. In fact I should really stop throwing myself down silly stuff and ride some easier trails to work on my skills. But I can’t imagine ever wanting to ride that trail without (proper) suspension. I know what you mean about the dropper though. I reallymissed mine as well.

Cheers

Andy

I didn’t say I rode it all!. It was a shit day but I was in the area anyway so I thought it was worth a go. Fantastic traction going up the way but scary on some of the descents. I could have done with lowering my seatpost but it’s not on a Q/R and I’d handily forgotten my multitool.

I did half the Black route. In fact, my favourite bit was probably the wee short-cut section.

Carbisdale was fun too – if a bit short (so I went round again).

Shorty on a 29er? You’ll need one of these

26-29 by rOcKeTdOgUk, on Flickr

Half the back on a fat bike still sounds insane to me. Thanks for the tip on Carbisdale. We’re up near Ardgay for the week. Sounds as though it could be worth sneaking out before the rest of the family are up and trying to get a few laps in.

Cheers,

Andy

Hmmm. Is this another “myth” in my head about to be exploded that a 26″ bike is far better at this sort of fiddly, niggly interrupty stuff?

29ers aren’t faster on smooth trails in my experience, but they do hold speed and flow better over rough sections and trail features. They also reduce the risk of getting stuck at slow speeds in gaps between rocks and roots, up and down steps etc.

However my 26er was better through the fiddly, twisty stuff.

Pro’s and con’s for both. Just make your choice and go ride I say.

I’m seriously interested in getting a 29er trail bike. Have you 29er owners found them suited to aggressive trail riding (i.e Lake District descents, Peaks etc)? I don’t mean big jumps etc, but rocky descents where the bike takes a pounding. I was thinking about the new Specialized Camber.

Have you 29er owners found them suited to aggressive trail riding (i.e Lake District descents, Peaks etc)? I don’t mean big jumps etc, but rocky descents where the bike takes a pounding.

This is exactly where a 29er trail bike excels in my experience.

My local trails are in SE England (South Downs, Surrey Hills etc) and I have found only slight advantages from my 29er there, and some drawbacks too, but when i’ve taken it to Wales a couple of times this summer the big wheels came into their own on exactly the type of trails you describe.