Just musing on the fact that my next build (liteville 301 Mm11) is costing a small fortune and so to mitigate the costs (a little bit), I was considering running my beloved American Classic wheels (26″) in the 650b compatible frame for the time being.

I’m not desperate to run 650b but I got the frame on the understanding that I have future proofed myself to some degree.

Other than lowering the BB height a bit I can’t think of any problems running the 26ers (especially as I’m running some fairly large volume Bonty XR4’s) but obviously I could be horribly wrong.

My Mk11 is due any day. I’ll be using my existing 26″ kit on it

Oooooh what build ? (Am I hijacking my own thread already ?)

It’ll probably lower the bottom bracket slightly, improving corrnering, give you a wider range of comparatively lighter tyres in turn improving grip and or rolling resistance. It’ll accelerate slightly faster, decelerate slightly better and changer direction slightly better.

Oh and you’ll have lighter stronger wheels.

But it’ll roll .7% worse. I wouldnt chance it.

^^^^^LOL^^^^^^^

Think you need to look very closely at this before you buy that frame. As I am looking at exactly the same set up.

But

It’s a 26 inch wheel frame that is 650b compatible – I cant get an answer from Liteville about what the 650b geometry is!!

As the listed geometry is with 26 inch wheels not 650b so the slack head angle stays the same but the low bottom bracket with 26 inch wheels that everybody raves about disappears with 650b. If you run it with 160mm travel on the rear the bb height seems to go sky high.

I would love to buy a 301 – but nobody so far is giving the answers to these questions.

Oh – I would love to be proved wrong on this one (as I would love one of these frames) – but so far I’m not being. 3 emails sent to liteville who just confirm its 650b compatible.

my prediction is that once 650b becomes the norm all the niche product must have’ers will start bolting 26″ wheels to them followed by a full blown industry return to 26″ wheels. . . just so they can re-introduce the tweeners and wagon wheelers again a few years down the line.

some people will believe whatever the media tells them no matter how little data or common sense there is to back it up.

Rik, too late, already bought it. I will be running it as 26’er initially anyway and may indeed continue to do so without worrying overly about the 650b thing.

I checked the clearances with a 650b wheel in the rear and there’s plenty of room so the only issue is increased bb height. Given the variance in tyre dimensions, the minimal difference in wheel sizes, tyre pressures and options re sag I’m not massively concerned about the bb height.

Am I just too blasé ?

join the revolution – keep 26 inch alive!

Unless you have no choice.. blah …blah..blah…

Hopefully someone like superstar or dmr will keep the 26 turning over..

maybe 27.5 is brilliant for some too..choice is after all good.

It depends if the bike already has a slammed BB. Pedalling could get perilous.

Buzz, yes I can see that.

Short cranks anyone ? Not that I really think it’ll get to that. Have yet to hear any bad things said about Litevilles.

New thread beckons.

A 650b rim with a 2.1″ tyre is actually only just over 27″ in diameter.

I had some Bontrager XR4’s in 2.2″ version (HUGE for a 2.2″) and they measured, yes you’ve guessed it, a smidge over 27″ in diameter once installed on a rim!

In short, running a large volume 26″ tyre gives you the same rolling radius as a slightly narrower 650b tyre, but you can run slightly lower pressures for better grip! And not only that, large grippy 26″ tyres are massively abundant everywhere already… It’ll catch on I tell ya! 😉

i guess something like a single ply 26 inch 2.3 or 2.4?? maxxis high roller would fit and also help out with traction without a clearance problem. Diameter would prolly be similar to a 27.5 I guess anyway. Also would keep the market open for both 27.5 frames and 26 inch wheels / tyres.

Mboy and Iamrough…. My thoughts exactly.

Oooooh what build ? (Am I hijacking my own thread already ?)

It’s all the stuff off my Yeti. So 2x10XT, though new XTR front mech, kings on stans 355s, fix vanilla rlc 140mm, thomson/easton

In short, running a large volume 26″ tyre gives you the same rolling radius as a slightly narrower 650b tyre, but you can run slightly lower pressures for better grip! And not only that, large grippy 26″ tyres are massively abundant everywhere already… It’ll catch on I tell ya!

Some people seriously have there head in the sand. It’s no where near the same size. There is 25mm or 1 inch difference. It might not sound a lot but most people you see riding proper rocky trails will go for a large volume tyre like a 2.35. Put a 2.35 on a 27.5 inch wheel, you are going to need a 3.35 inch tyre on the 26 to be the same size – how often do you see them on the trails then.

Don’t worry you can go and put your head back in the sand now.

Surly instigator… 26 x 2.75″ on a 50mm rim is 700mm or 27.508974567 inches.

My 2.4 RQ’s aren’t far off that 😆

Other than lowering the BB height a bit I can’t think of any problems running the 26ers (especially as I’m running some fairly large volume Bonty XR4’s) but obviously I could be horribly wrong.

Surely the BB will be too low, because if it isn’t then it’s (been designed) too high.

And since you’d be running high-volume tyres anyway, with 650B wheels, running high-volume 26″ tyres won’t make a fig of difference. It’ll still be 1/2″ lower.

It’ll still be 1 ½” lower.

FTFY.

@Rik: The 1″ difference is in diameter not radius though, so your 2.35″ tyre has to go to 2.85″ rather than 3.35″. At least I think that’s right.

I don’t think tyre size easily translates to radius… The 2.35 refers to the width not height. You really need to measure them.

I think roverpig’s right. The difference in 26 vs 650B from axle to the bottom of the rim is ~12mm. Calling that “nowhere near” is retarded, even with the same tyres on.

I’ve been looking at buying a particular 650b frame so I can run it with 26″ wheels to lower the bottom bracket a tad… from the geometry the BB height is the same as the 26″ wheeled frame I have now so it should work great.

Any issues running 26″ wheels on 650b bike ?

Your question is all wrong anyway… Any issues running 26″ wheels on 650b26″ bike (which has been confirmed as able to take 650b wheels) ?

One question though… are the forks your going to run longer than standard 26″ forks? If they are this may effect the geometry far greater than a few mm on both tyres. I.e. I remember seeing somewhere that Fox 34 650b forks are 15mm longer than the 26″ wheeled version… which would make them 5mm longer than a 160mm Fox 36??? This may not be true and again may make almost no difference to the handling of the bike but if your worried about what 5-10mm on the tyres will do to the handling this should give you nightmares 😉 .

Any issues running 26″ wheels on 650b26″ bike (which has been confirmed as able to take 650b wheels) ?

Just what I was thinking. Don’t get what the OP is worried about.

Ok boys, yes your redefining of the question is right
So perhaps the question should be what if I run the bike with 27.5 forks.

Answering my own question (I think) I’ll raise by b&b a tad and slacken the bike 1/2 a degree or so.

Will I care / notice ? I don’t know cos I’m not going to shell out for a 26″ fork as well as the future proofed 27.5 just to test it.

Bloody bike marketeers, they’re messing with my head and my wallet.

Tell you what I’ll just ride the damned thing and enjoy it !

charlie the bikemonger – Member
I don’t think tyre size easily translates to radius… The 2.35 refers to the width not height. You really need to measure them.

The main thing is that 26 inch wheels with a large 2.35 tyre are no where near in size to a 650b with the same brand 2.35 tyre on – no where near. So no point people going on about about 2.4 rubber queens and the like.

The main selling point of the liteville is the slack and low geometry – but put one the 650b main tyre of choices on the Hans Dampf and 160mm forks and plates on at the geometry suggests the bb height will be about or over 14.5 inches tall – that’s more than most DH bikes these days.

Liteville need to bring out a mk12 which is mainly 650b and 26 inch compatible. There you can run your old dh gear and forks and 2.5 super tacky tyres (no dual plys in 650b yet) for the Alps in 26inch wheels and befit from the lower bb when your only pedalling 5% of the time. And put the 650b forks and tyres on for at home for normal riding and enduros if you are in to that and benefit from the dedicated slack and low 650b geometry rather than a half way house.

Sorry, but “nowhere near” is complete, utter and absolute bollocks.
It 25 millimeters FFS.

And 25mm makes a heck of a difference on feeling of the bike when you are dealing with bb height

I don’t disagree about the BB height. The wheel size is a different matter entirely.
Us sceptics are probably wasting our breath, 650B is coming. I am yet to see a convincing argument that its sufficiently different to merit a new standard though.

I don’t really care about wheel sizes in all fairness as we are not going to have any control of what turns out to be the dominate size on top end bikes.

The thread was started about 650b wheels on a 26inch frame – what I am trying to get across is that it might not make any difference to fitting it in the frame and forks but the big effect will be on the bb height and the overall handing if the whole bike will be effected quite substantially esp. with large tyres like Hans Dampfs

The thread was started about 650b wheels on a 26inch frame

And I do realise this statement is the opposite of the first post – but a liteville 301 is a 26inch frame that is 650b compatible and not the other way round. Which is a whole different ball game and actually in the right environment could be quite good. 26inch wheels in a 650b frame.

And 25mm makes a heck of a difference on feeling of the bike when you are dealing with bb height

I’m sure it does, but to reiterate, that’s the difference between 650B and 559mm rim diameter. It’s the radius difference (12.5mm) that affects the bb height (assuming all else equal).

Would 12mm make a noticeable difference?

Having not done the sums and taken folks word for it 12mm won’t make much difference to BB height on a bike where that height varies by about 5 inches anyway!!

Would 12mm make a noticeable difference?

Yeah probably. On some bikes (like the Coves I’ve owned) it’d be disasterous, but on others it’d just make them ride like Coves – great for pedalling over bumps but not so good at cornering and climbing.

I previously showed an example difference between a 26″ Specialized Butcher Control (quite a big tyre, comes up almost the same size as a 2.5″ Minion DHF) and a 650B Maxxis 2.2 High Roller 2.

The 26″ wheel actually measured 27″ in diameter. The 650B was 28.25″. When compared with the same tyre but in 2.4″ format, the diameter was 28.59″ (similar width).

40mm diameter is a noticable difference. Also a ~20mm difference in BB height makes a massive difference. It can completely change how a bike feels.

Remember its not just the bb height that matters. Its the bb height in relation to the axle heights that changes ease of manualling etc. Dont forget that the axle to bb drop will not change. So bb changes not going to make ad much diff as it would changing it through shock placement etc.

Remember its not just the bb height that matters. Its the bb height in relation to the axle heights

boomting. you win.