By which i mean, has anyone actually done any research on whether they actually do cover ground for less effort? Something pretty simple, such as a slope down and then flatish land to see how far a 29er traveled v’s a 26er, given the same tyres (whatever is available and most representative in both sizes, with the same rider on board (so weight is the same) on the same day would let us know whether the ‘slower aceleration’ was made up for by the increased ‘rollability’ of the wheeles. Oh, and it’d have to be on something like a Giant anthem (avaialble in both sizes, so suspension differancies don’t come into play) or even better, something rigid.
Just thinking ou tloud, no axe to grind either way.

Just like the fosters ad

If they were, 26ers would on longer exist.

check out:
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/bicycle-tires-puncturing-the-myths-29245/

but 29ers are so 2010

36er

the ‘slower aceleration’ was made up for by the increased ‘rollability’ of the wheeles.

it is vastly more complicated than that.

There’s been a couple of b2b tests in stw & mbr. Seems that the conclusion was horses for courses.

I did my own last friday night between my old orange crush & my less old on-one scandal. On the same 30 min loop taking in a climb & descent i concluded that the 29er was marginally less sh1t.
HTH

Conclusion always seems to be ‘It depends’.

Best bet is to try both on the sort of ride you normally do and see which you prefer, really.

The ‘better’ bike is the one you like riding 🙂

i had a scandal 29 for a year or so about 3 years back and it was ok, but not the groundbreaking uber-smooth rolling thang’ that you might expect. worst bit for me was that on the rocky techy bits on the moors above my house the wheels seemed to cause more hassle through jarring. anyway, when i sold it i whipped up a 26 hardtail yeti arc just to see which i preferred – and the yeti is still in here. 26 for me.

With these new power measuring devices in the pedals, it would be interesting to see some proper scientific research to compare 26ers with 29ers and Rohloffs with derailleurs to see how much difference it really makes.

Graham – while you’re on here.
Have you ever left your rohloff unused for a long period of time?

Ive been ridign SS for the last 18-24m but last night refitted my rohloff to one of the 29ers ready for a welsh trail trip and the hub was Im sure a bit more draggy than it was when I took it off.

Maybe it needs a few miles to ease up a bit…

No. They are not BETTER at all. Just DIFFERENT. 🙂

29er’s – are they measurably better?

Yes, 3″ 🙄

Never noticed that.
I’ve got a spare bike, so it’s not uncommon for one of my Rohloff hubs to sit around unused for a few months.
The two hubs definitely feel and sound different to each other, but I’ve never noticed any increase in drag with lack of use, or improvement with use.

Yes 29ers are not only scientifically proven to be faster, they also magically imbue the rider with super sexytime abilities which means that 29er riders will outbreed The little wheelers and therefor according to darwinian theory ikkle wheels riders will become extinct

PeterPoddy – Member
No. They are not BETTER at all. Just DIFFERENT.

THIS.

Although “good at some stuff, less good at other stuff” doesn’t really fit the internet convention of things being either “THE MOST AWESOMEST THING EVOH” or “SHITE” with nothign in between.

I tried a 29er. It rolled well, it carried speed, it climbed great, it wasn’t much fun and was hard work in the corners. Bought a Soul.

Be useful if the fors and agins stated their height…

At 6’3″ I’ve had it in mind that 29″ might be the right wheel size for me.

Had a pootle round a car park on one a few weeks ago and it felt very “tippy toed” – ok, utterly unscientific, unrepresentative of real riding conditions (and it was a bloody ss 😉 )…

Felt like it would take a bit of getting used to. Most 26ers I can jump on and weigh up whether I like or not pretty quickly. The 29er I really wasn’t sure – instinctively I didn’t feel comfortable, but rationaly I didn’t have a feel if it would be “better when used to”

in answer to the O.P.

yes.

6’4″ and would never consider going back to kids wheels again.

Don’t lots of (most?) pro racers use them? So I’d imagine there must be something in it. I’m not a pro racer though so I’m not that bothered about ‘optimum efficiency’, just having fun on my bike – which I have plenty of on my horrifically outmoded 26″ wheel bike.

better at what????

climbing?
technical ability?
speed?
cornering?
long distance?
jumps?

I would think the best people to ask are seasoned racers that are completely in tune with there bikes every detail/set-up

As with any bike – a advantage in one area is compromise in the hands of another man.

I think we need to be asking what we want from a bike first and then ask the question would 29″ wheels be an advantage?

The differences between different 29ers are as big as the differences between 26ers and 29ers.

It’s a shame such a specific question should get nothing more than the usual collection of anecdotes as replies.

It’s also a shame that none of the magazines are interested in doing proper product testing that could answer these sort of questions, instead of just copy & pasting press releases.

It’s also a shame that none of the magazines are interested in doing proper product testing that could answer these sort of questions

It’s because apart from a few proper nerdy types that no-one would want to chat to in the pub – people don’t really care.

The main difference with 29ers seems to be the smugness and superiority complex of the people who talk about them on internet forums.

on’t lots of (most?) pro racers use them? So I’d imagine there must be something in it

Sponsorship.

If your sponsor wants to sell lots of a certain type of bike then they’ll ask you to ride it.

(see also downhillers still wearing ‘baggy’ clothing having been banned from wearing skinsuits by the UCI after pressure from sponsors)

It’s also a shame that none of the magazines are interested in doing proper product testing that could answer these sort of questions, instead of just copy & pasting press releases.

If one was genuinely better we wouldn’t have both. As has been said, they are just different. Nothing more can be offered than anecdotes, as you can’t put empirical data to the difference.

Yes you could do myriad tests using power output, but you won’t get the same result in every scenario. 26″ wheels are lighter as there’s less material, there’s nothing you can do about that. Anything you make in 29″ will always be lighter in 26″ guise.

It’s because apart from a few proper nerdy types that no-one would want to chat to in the pub – people don’t really care.

But surely they do – hence this thread and many like it…

A lot of riders will be reluctant to shell out good money to “just try” a new format without a good reason to do so.

Things like QR / bolt through, headsets, BB formats etc we get less choice about – manufacturers incorporate into their new models anyway. Wheel size / whole new bike format (with the other format still mainstream), a whole different question.

26″ wheels are lighter as there’s less material, there’s nothing you can do about that. Anything you make in 29″ will always be lighter in 26″ guise

This is a key issue for me.

Looked at the 26er and 29er versions of the the Scott Scale earlier this month. Scale 29 about same price as the Scale 30 (26er), but wheels and tyres make it heavier…

… and given that wheels and tyres are one of the most beneficial areas to save weight on, going for a heavier format wheel setup really does need to bring some measurable benefit to justify it

I’m surprised that there are any 29ers left tbh,I would of thought they would of all exploded by now,killing/maiming every living creature in the near vicinity.

going for a heavier format wheel setup really does need to bring some measurable benefit to justify it

What measurable benefit would convince you though? Isn’t the most important thing how the bike feels when you’re riding it (unless you’re racing)?

I think all you can realistically do is judge them with physics.

the rest is down to rider/terrain which is near impossible to measure.

Njee20, what I was thinking was two bikes, as near as possible identical, except one’s a 26er and the other’s a 29er.
Fit the power measuring pedals, do a lap of Ashton Court, Follow the Dog, Malvern Hills End to End, South Downs Way or whatever, then see which one was the most efficient.

At least it would give some sort of objective data for the 29er curious to base their opinions on.

do a lap of Ashton Court, Follow the Dog, Malvern Hills End to End, South Downs Way or whatever

Is that so as to encompass everything that mountain biking has to offer in terms of variety of terrain? 😕

MTG,
I believe quite a few ride for the fun of it,regardless of efficiency….

Even if they are ‘better’ on paper, they still look shite imho.

Grum, no it’s just four examples. Pick some others.

xckeith, the thread started with a specific question, that’s what I’m responding to.

Njee20, what I was thinking was two bikes, as near as possible identical, except one’s a 26er and the other’s a 29er.
Fit the power measuring pedals, do a lap of Ashton Court, Follow the Dog, Malvern Hills End to End, South Downs Way or whatever, then see which one was the most efficient.

At least it would give some sort of objective data for the 29er curious to base their opinions on.

In those scenarios, under that tester. Repeat the experiment with FS and hardtails, we could eliminate all but the most efficient bikes, we’ll all be riding exactly the same bike soon! Data would be meaningless, you’ve been able to do power on an MTB for ages, but you can’t really use it to say conclusively “x is better than y” in the same way you can test (for example) aerodynamics on the road.

MTG,
I’d already answered the original question 😉

What measurable benefit would convince you though? Isn’t the most important thing how the bike feels when you’re riding it (unless you’re racing)?

Ok, so my reference bike of old – 26″ Ti race hardtail. Feels very different according to wheel and tyre set up.

Light race tyres make it feel much more skittish and lively, harder to control, easier to run wide, but feels like the bike is alive with accerleration – always ready to pick up the pace in an instant – provided your heart and lungs can keep up (often not… 😥 )

Add light race wheels and the effect is magnified. Add heavy wheels, or big 2.3 tyres and the bike feels sluggish, much harder work.

Now, this “feel” is easy for the rider to recognise…

… the “feel” also links back to what the physics says – lighter rotating weight will take less effort to accelerate to a given velocity…

As they say, you “cannae change th’ laws o’ physics”

My times for Dalby red route – Imo it represents an average to good trail centre and suits a 29er. It feels faster on the boring stuff and no slower in the more interesting parts. I think suspension would make it faster but the majority of what i ride day to day doesnt warrant suspension so im happier to keep it pretty lightweight with the rigid.
26inch Ti hardtail with suspension – 1.58
Same bike rigid – 2.02
29er rigid 1-55. Conditions were always dry and suited a quick attempt.
Ive only ridded dalby on the 29er twice now but tried many times to better my time on the 26inch and thats the fastest ive got.
Im 6 foot.