Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

26? What's the point??!!

119K views 783 replies 200 participants last post by  MattiThundrrr 
#1 · (Edited)
I'm really interested in hearing what you love about your obsolete hoops. Okay I'll admit... I'm one of those people who bucks the tide, goes against the grain. I have issues with authority. I'll prove I can do it on 26" just because I can.

Me first:
I've got the "Magic Bike". The One. It may not be your first choice, it may not be ultra-fancy or expensive...but when I sit down, and reach out...my hands rest exactly where they need to be. My fingers contact my levers at exactly the right points. My ride takes off like a rocket and effortlessly soars with a smile. My hoops are stout, I never second-guess a landing.

I may exert my authority over my cockpit when traversing rocky, gnarly flats...but I get through them. The benefits outweigh the deficit.

That's me. That's my 26" preference.
 
#19 ·
I still have and ride a 26er because I have no interest in bigger, "better" wheels. I have no interest in KOMs. I have no interest in pissing matches in parking lots about who spent the most on their bike (and still can't ride it for ****). I have no faith in the bike industry anymore. I have been riding a 26er for a better part of 20 years and am still able to manage just fine. And, most importantly, I am too old to give a **** about new fads and such. I simply ride what I have and enjoy the hell out of it.
 
#245 ·
Man, discussions like these harden my heart for the sport. Just like quite a few others on here, I started Mtnbkg in the early 90s and have loved it ever since. I've made a lot of friends that way and have had some really awesome experiences. At that time, you would come across another Mtnbkr and you could guarantee they were pretty cool. One of the best group of guys you could know. It's how I encouraged my friends to get a bike and join me and they immediately noticed the same. No one cared what bike you had, what gear or even what you wore. Hell, if you were in cut off jeans and a skateboard helmet, the more experienced and hardcore you looked and it typically fit. They were the badasses on the trail.

Then, all of a sudden it seemed there was a riff. Something changed overnight. Pretty boys were too worried about how they looked and what they rode instead of how they rode. They'd scuff at guys like me with my properly used bike and gear but then we'd proceed to whip their tail on the trail. New riders weren't and aren't as friendly anymore. So many of them turn out to be A-holes who fly on by a downed rider or will stick their nose up at you.

We shouldn't have to ever make these stupid points on these types of threads anymore. Only thing to say is to get the gear that works for *you*. 26 works for me because I'm 5'8'. A 29 fits my brother because he's 6'4". Simple. Neither is better than the other, just the best for each others size. I'd be a fool to be on a 29r. He looked like a giant on a 26r.

I've had an Elsworth Truth since '01 and will always continue to ride it. Wouldn't trade that 26 for anything. It fits me, is one bada$$ bike and I haven't been on another like it that has catered to my style so well.

Now I'm getting my son involved in mountain biking. We take his BMX 20in out because it fits him and he's doing great things with it. Even though he's enjoying it immensely, I get pissed at the looks and side marks he receives especially from those that have no clue what they're doing. When he's older and bigger and has mastered maneuvering a bike around, he'll get a bigger bike and then learn the next step of gearing. Again, simple but it's those other pathetic riders that are starting to turn us away from it and it shouldn't be that way.

Wish everyone would take a chill pill, step away from this marketing BS that has destroyed the camaraderie of this sport, and go back to enjoying it as it was. Get on a bike, any bike, head to the trail and enjoy.
 
#252 ·
Man, discussions like these harden my heart for the sport. Just like quite a few others on here, I started Mtnbkg in the early 90s and have loved it ever since. I've made a lot of friends that way and have had some really awesome experiences. At that time, you would come across another Mtnbkr and you could guarantee they were pretty cool. One of the best group of guys you could know. It's how I encouraged my friends to get a bike and join me and they immediately noticed the same. No one cared what bike you had, what gear or even what you wore. Hell, if you were in cut off jeans and a skateboard helmet, the more experienced and hardcore you looked and it typically fit. They were the badasses on the trail.

Then, all of a sudden it seemed there was a riff. Something changed overnight. Pretty boys were too worried about how they looked and what they rode instead of how they rode. They'd scuff at guys like me with my properly used bike and gear but then we'd proceed to whip their tail on the trail. New riders weren't and aren't as friendly anymore. So many of them turn out to be A-holes who fly on by a downed rider or will stick their nose up at you.

We shouldn't have to ever make these stupid points on these types of threads anymore. Only thing to say is to get the gear that works for *you*. 26 works for me because I'm 5'8'. A 29 fits my brother because he's 6'4". Simple. Neither is better than the other, just the best for each others size. I'd be a fool to be on a 29r. He looked like a giant on a 26r.

I've had an Elsworth Truth since '01 and will always continue to ride it. Wouldn't trade that 26 for anything. It fits me, is one bada$$ bike and I haven't been on another like it that has catered to my style so well.

Now I'm getting my son involved in mountain biking. We take his BMX 20in out because it fits him and he's doing great things with it. Even though he's enjoying it immensely, I get pissed at the looks and side marks he receives especially from those that have no clue what they're doing. When he's older and bigger and has mastered maneuvering a bike around, he'll get a bigger bike and then learn the next step of gearing. Again, simple but it's those other pathetic riders that are starting to turn us away from it and it shouldn't be that way.

Wish everyone would take a chill pill, step away from this marketing BS that has destroyed the camaraderie of this sport, and go back to enjoying it as it was. Get on a bike, any bike, head to the trail and enjoy.
I've been riding since the late 90's, and until this day the only place I every really see anyone giving a crap about what you are riding, or being anything but gracious and cool to fellow riders in on the internet.

...and California.
 
#668 ·
I'm getting a lot of grey hair now. I'm 59!

Riding in the 80-90's there was no discussion about wheel size. All the tires were pizza cutters by today's standards.

Tubeless was not even on the horizon.

Just to survive a weekend of gnarly riding would entail all kinds McGuivery.

The style of riding was heavily influenced by the exacting requirements in equipment preparation and riding technique.

Low air pressure was dangerous back then. If I wanted to shred down something, in direct contrast to today, I'd air up the tires to resist pinch flats.

Suspension was non-existent or ludicrous. Suspension was in the arms, legs, neck, back, and ass.

Vision could be impaired by vibration. We'd take hits so hard that loose helmets and glasses could shift position on the cranium. Hilarious.

It was important to know the trail very well, so as to anticipate the deep pockets, ruts, rills, ramps, and tombstones.

Of course usually the action was not based upon recall.

Typically, as it is today, you just took it on the fly, making adjustments in body positioning, and arm and leg piston retraction and extension, to enable the rigid 26" bike wheels to track over the obstacles, rather than conforming to the terrain as modern full suspension bikes do.

There was a lot more on the line in those times.

Hell yeah, as mentioned earlier, the trails were different, and so was the attitude. Things were as they were, so to speak. Trails weren't made for mountain bikes.

We sort of arrived on the trails, maybe uninvited, yet certainly fulfilling an inevitable destiny.

And we discovered trails that were overlooked by a few generations of hikers. We discovered game trails, log skids, gulches, washes, fall-lines, ridges, landslides; any place you could fit a bike, we'd be there.

No Google Earth either.

Some of that stuff was burly as ****!

And the brakes were so lousy that many times the descents were unstoppable, and a rider was forced to a continuous involuntary commitment of unpredictable velocity.

All this with your belly or chest on around saddle, thighs flared so they don't get too scratched up from the cantilever brakes at the extreme.

Since there wasn't as much riding going on, the "trails" would often be filled with all kinds of loose materials such as of course rocks and sticks, moss chunks, clods, logs, hummocks of bunch grass, fern clumps, deep drifts of leaves, thorny vines, low branches, and occasional huge fallen logs, springs, bogs, mud pits, and quick sand.

Almost all of the charismatic descents are extinct now due to the land management agency trail emasculating activity.

We would celebrate sections of "buff" trail with hoots of joy to cover a quarter of a mile without resorting to trials riding.

So yeah, trials was a thing.

It was good enough to descend a trail without dabbing, let alone setting some sort of time record.

If anything comes from this rant, it's that trials skills were a part of original 26" bike riding. Flow really didn't exist, per se, in my neck of the woods.

I don't mind today's flow trails, but I do not seek them out.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
#669 ·
I'm getting a lot of grey hair now. I'm 59!

Riding in the 80-90's there was no discussion about wheel size. All the tires were pizza cutters by today's standards.

Tubeless was not even on the horizon.

Just to survive a weekend of gnarly riding would entail all kinds McGuivery.

The style of riding was heavily influenced by the exacting requirements in equipment preparation and riding technique.

Low air pressure was dangerous back then. If I wanted to shred down something, in direct contrast to today, I'd air up the tires to resist pinch flats.

Suspension was non-existent or ludicrous. Suspension was in the arms, legs, neck, back, and ass.

Vision could be impaired by vibration. We'd take hits so hard that loose helmets and glasses could shift position on the cranium. Hilarious.

It was important to know the trail very well, so as to anticipate the deep pockets, ruts, rills, ramps, and tombstones.

Of course usually the action was not based upon recall.

Typically, as it is today, you just took it on the fly, making adjustments in body positioning, and arm and leg piston retraction and extension, to enable the rigid 26" bike wheels to track over the obstacles, rather than conforming to the terrain as modern full suspension bikes do.

There was a lot more on the line in those times.

Hell yeah, as mentioned earlier, the trails were different, and so was the attitude. Things were as they were, so to speak. Trails weren't made for mountain bikes.

We sort of arrived on the trails, maybe uninvited, yet certainly fulfilling an inevitable destiny.

And we discovered trails that were overlooked by a few generations of hikers. We discovered game trails, log skids, gulches, washes, fall-lines, ridges, landslides; any place you could fit a bike, we'd be there.

No Google Earth either.

Some of that stuff was burly as ****!

And the brakes were so lousy that many times the descents were unstoppable, and a rider was forced to a continuous involuntary commitment of unpredictable velocity.

All this with your belly or chest on around saddle, thighs flared so they don't get too scratched up from the cantilever brakes at the extreme.

Since there wasn't as much riding going on, the "trails" would often be filled with all kinds of loose materials such as of course rocks and sticks, moss chunks, clods, logs, hummocks of bunch grass, fern clumps, deep drifts of leaves, thorny vines, low branches, and occasional huge fallen logs, springs, bogs, mud pits, and quick sand.

Almost all of the charismatic descents are extinct now due to the land management agency trail emasculating activity.

We would celebrate sections of "buff" trail with hoots of joy to cover a quarter of a mile without resorting to trials riding.

So yeah, trials was a thing.

It was good enough to descend a trail without dabbing, let alone setting some sort of time record.

If anything comes from this rant, it's that trials skills were a part of original 26" bike riding. Flow really didn't exist, per se, in my neck of the woods.

I don't mind today's flow trails, but I do not seek them out.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
I've been hanging around reading the forums for better than a year now. Never have I read a post here that better describes my experiences. It clarifies my noob bewilderment reading about XC riding here and now.

My trails don't look like the ones pictured in most posts. Twisty, rooty, climby, tight turny hiking trails that I see very few bike tracks on even in the dead of Summer.

Both my bikes don't look like the ones pictured in anything except vintage whip posts. A couple of rigid bikes, one from the 80's, one from 2011 with them new fangled mechanical discs & retrofitted with a rigid fork. Both rebuilt & running smoothly without rebuilding suspensions annually. I have discovered the joys of lower tire pressure, though!

I don't catch big air, instead I pick my way through uneven footing, trackstanding until the line becomes clear, then heading another 30 yards to the next minor obstacle. My lowest, and second lowest, gear ratio is the overwhelming favorite.

In my two years of noobishness, I've had a few chances to ride a pump track about an hour's drive for me. Buddy, it was FUN! I can see how this flow thing could get addicting. But that's not the reality of my nearby trails, so I'll continue to rejoice in those mornings that I didn't have to dab a toe anywhere on my ride.

I'm 66, and two lessons life taught me are: speed kills and skills outlast luck. I'll just poke along and practice to avoid broken bones at my age. It's nice to know that I'm really mountain biking, though, despite it not looking like anything here!
 
#246 ·
Why 26....

1. It works and is fun
2. I am not racing.
3. I don't have the time anymore to play the upgrade game.
4. I like working on my bikes and am happy with tech from 1 gen. ago.
5. I don't need thru axles, carbon rims, 1.11 drive trains, dropper seat posts, and 12 inches of dual suspension to enjoy midwest singletrack.
6. Some days I would rather go a tad (and it is a "tad") slower and enjoy working through tech sections instead of bombing through them.
7. I'm short and my size S. 29er gets ton of toe overlapp, pedal strike, and bottom bracket strikes when rolling drops.
8. My weight is more of a performance detractor than my bike...
 
#255 ·
Sounds a lot like me. I also learned from my mother to consider your purchases and buy something that will serve you a long time. Not always the cheapest, not always the most expensive, just getting good bang for your buck. My '90 Marin is still serving me well. I'm not going to play the upgrade game already mentioned, just because. I'm a cheap b@$t@*d!!
 
#423 ·
Love old bikes

I recently retired (62):cool: and found an old 26" Omega 1800 in my back ally. I rode the hell out of that bike. It got me into fixing, riding bikes and restoring them.
Right now I have restored magnas, and given them to friends and family, I did a Trek 820, Nishiki Manitoba, Giant Cypress DX for my wife, Schwinn Seirra, Nishiki Century road bike, and in the last two weeks I bought a1986 Bridgestone MB2 all original in great shape for 15.00 (Had an old Wilderness Trail Bikes seat) and today I bought a Univega Range Rover for 5.00 in rideable shape. I sell a few and put the money into bike tools. I ride all these bikes, on flat trails and paved trails. 20-50 miles a week.
I only wish I could have discovered biking at 18-20 years of age, but I am happy with what I got and my wife and I have a blast. ( Rode my first BMX race last year and placed third, I will leave that to the younger guys due to bad neck. :nono: I will post pics in a few days.
(Never pay retail!!!)
 
#424 ·
I recently retired (62):cool: and found an old 26" Omega 1800 in my back ally. I rode the hell out of that bike. It got me into fixing, riding bikes and restoring them.
Right now I have restored magnas, and given them to friends and family, I did a Trek 820, Nishiki Manitoba, Giant Cypress DX for my wife, Schwinn Seirra, Nishiki Century road bike, and in the last two weeks I bought a1986 Bridgestone MB2 all original in great shape for 15.00 (Had an old Wilderness Trail Bikes seat) and today I bought a Univega Range Rover for 5.00 in rideable shape. I sell a few and put the money into bike tools. I ride all these bikes, on flat trails and paved trails. 20-50 miles a week.
I only wish I could have discovered biking at 18-20 years of age, but I am happy with what I got and my wife and I have a blast. ( Rode my first BMX race last year and placed third, I will leave that to the younger guys due to bad neck. :nono: I will post pics in a few days.
(Never pay retail!!!)
Congrats on your new interest. I also learned by fixing up old bikes. Have fun and welcome to the site.
 
#4 ·
Lighter and currently a bargain to buy or build and they work... I don't think I'll ever race again, I have no desire to drop a few grand on a new bike probably ever again.

Current 26's, 2 are semi-permanently being used by other family members:
2012 Santa Cruz Blur LT2
2008 Specialized Epic Marathon
2008 Trek Fuel 9
99 Bontrager Privateer Comp
97 Bontrager Privateer S
96 Bontrager Privateer Comp
96 Voodoo Djab Single Speed

I have never found a 27.5 or 29er that resembles the snappy feeling of these older XC bikes. And it's funny, I lend 2 of the bontragers to friends routinely, and there's almost always the look of shock when they ride one the first time. The way the bike moves with you seemingly without any effort is something that has escaped most modern setups, and even escaped most older setups.

If I were to get a newer bike, I'd be looking at a Salsa El Mariachi Titanium, however, it's not exactly new since they stopped making the ti version a few years ago. There's a few others, also titanium, 27.5 or 29ers I've looked at but long shot at this moment. The Salsa Bucksaw carbon looks like a blast, and if I still lived in Colorado, I'd seriously consider one, but it's no use to me living down in Texas now.
 
#10 ·
There's a number of reasons...
I got into riding in early 90's so everything from then is better of course...
I've got my GT Xizang, this is my dream bike,I always wanted one. now it's not perfect, V-brakes work fine(but discs are better) and it probably doesn't fit me perfectly,maybe a bit long (or maybe i'm a bit fat, more like). But it looks gorgeous and I love it and is perfectly fine for most of my riding.
Then I have my GT Zaskar, this was my original dream bike back in 92 until I discovered the Xizang existed,mines a reissue, so 4inch fork and discs... it fits me perfectly and handles amazingly, so far there is nothing I can't do that I can do on my 5inch 650b FS bike
Then I have my Yeti ARC, nice bike, comfy, looks cool, probably also doesn't fit that well like the Xizang but it gets by fine.

Some other things I like about these bikes, well I own them so thats great, they all tick my boxes a cool things, lots of parts have been on every at least 2 bikes (wheels, drivetrains, forks, brakes). I can take any part and put on any other bike (apart from brakes to the Xizang or seatpoles to the Zaskar) they are all pretty much the same standards.

Only reason I bought a 650b FS bike in 2015 was well, 29er look silly and getting a new 26in XC FS bike is like impossible.
 
#13 ·
26inch wheels help keep me sharp and my skill up. Riding a hardtail on top of that really helps with my core fitness. I love to feel the trail I'm riding..... I get all this with my 26 inch bikes. I don't buy the hype and never will. I understand the smooth feeling of a 29er on the trail and understand its place for some the 27.5/650b thing is kind of a head scratcher for me. I am also well aware and understand its the rider not the bike all my friends have high dollar very expensive 29ers and 27.5 full suspensions except one has a hardtail titanium 29er and I'm the fastest of the group on my 26 by a long way on the climbs and the flats its not even close. We did a standing down hill on payment I was on my single speed 26 we coasted down this road no peddling my bike put a 20ft gap on everyone by the time we hit the bottom of the hill:confused:. thing is the 29er math that critics are shoving down my throat doesn't seem to add up when I'm out riding hence why I don't buy the hype its that simple for me. Ride what you want and be happy just don't drop the wheel size I love because everyone else thinks I should ride wagon wheels. It's gotten so bad that I bring my bike in for its free annual tune at the bike shop and they try to sell my a 29er by telling me my bike is obsolete.
 

Attachments

#16 ·
It's all about the feel. 26" wheels spin up quicker and slow down faster. They're more flickable. I can steer with my hips on descents. They're so responsive, they feel telepathic. I think it, and they do it. Yes, they force you to make better line selections, but that's part of the fun for me. It's cliche now, but 26" wheels are like a sports car; as you go up in size, they become more like monster trucks.

Or I could just summarize and say I have more fun on 26" wheeled bikes.
 
#35 ·
Nicely said. I have always felt the 26" wheel bike is more intuitive on descents. Your body makes small unconscious adjustments for technicla terrain that are part of the skill set. I like to race here and there, and appreciate the stability of my 29er on courses I am not familiar with (coming up on my mid 50s, I like to stay off the ground more). But on a familiar descent, there is no comparison what I can do on the 26 compared to the 29 (Avid Ti V-Brakes=one-finger braking). Lent my 26er ST to a buddy, who has been hanging onto it. Got one more old 26er in the attic I am hoping to find time to reassemble. Looking forward to improving my balance skills too.
 
#28 ·
Better is relative.
I have a older Mountain Cycle Fury which is 26" with very nice components.
Why would I want to spend upwards of $3000 to get crappy stuff that wears quicker etc.
The mountain bike industry is so far up it's ass in "Robber Baron" mode right now, that if my frame breaks, I'll probably stick to pavement.
 
#51 ·
In grade school, my brother and I rode what we called "clunkers" with 20" wheels in a dump.

By 1974, wearing an ice hockey helmet, I was riding a Centurion 10 speed with 27 and 1/4 wheels on dirt where hunters poached.

After buying my first 26" wheeler bike, Diamond Back Topanga, and being introduced to real mountain bike trail riding, think it was 1988, what I called ATB riding, became a weekly ritual.

In 1996 I warranteed a broken plastic resin bike (early carbon fibre) for a Dean Ti Colonel 26" mountain bike. At the time, I considered this the ultimate expression of my devotion to mountain biking.

Time passes.

Around 2008 I started single speeding part time on a 26.

In 2009 a friend sold me his fresh 1995 Dean Colonel Ti bike built single speed. Identical to my original Dean Ti, the bike became a part of me.

I continue to single speed part time.

Today, despite riding an incredible 27.5 plus carbon fiber full suspension from time to time, I find that the 26" fully rigid SS more rewarding to ride every time, even if it kills me.

After all these years, that 26" wheel size does matter.


Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
 
#75 ·
Here is something interesting. I ride with a SS 26". I don't ride with groups. I am just starting out in MTB since I have been a roadie for over 7 years and into local racing for 4 years. I don't ride with groups and so I have no peer pressures. LOL I could be riding a $5k FS bike and no one would care or know. I am not good enough to race MTB. So, it would make no sense to follow the pro trend. Around here, NYC Long Island, the trails can easily be ridden with a SS!!!!! No hills or mountains. Mostly technical single track.
 
#278 ·
That's a good point but what is the price of a fairly nice new bike out the door? If it's $1500+ then $100-300 in upgrades for a $300-600 bike make a lot more sense. My budget is not the point. I have $50,000 in credit, I could go out and buy a $5000 bike tomorrow. That's not the principle of it. This is an experiment, to buy a cheap 26" and see how much better I can make it with basic brake and fork upgrades. It's an idea many would vomit thinking about, and that's OK, I will point them to the bathroom. I really want to feel and experience the difference on trails between a $270 26" first without and then with brake and fork upgrades, just to prove a point to myself more than anyone else. Some people on here get what I'm trying to do, others look down on the older technology as not even worth discussing, like a 100mm fork is the equivalent of a carburetor on a car, outdated and worthless. How about I tell you that I do XC, no jumps, no boulders, just basic trails (some very rocky), and you tell me the bike I "need".
 
#348 ·
I remember when cars were actually fun to drive. The suspension was stiff and communicative enough that you could feel exactly how much grip you had and what your tyres were doing. When manufacturers describe today's cars as 'sporty', I swear I do not know what they are taking about.

Most drivers want comfort over handling and manufactures want to sell their cars to the highest number of people. So we have dull cars.

I think bikes might be the same. Many bike innovations, like larger wheels, dull the experience and make life easier. They let the typical bike buyer, the middle-aged magazine addict, ride trails that would be too difficult for him otherwise. He can feel like a hero, riding his sedan around on tame trails, while these dull bikes mean that the only way more competent riders can drag a thrill out of them is by going ever faster and bigger.

So technically, the bikes are better in that they can deal with harsher terrain more easily, but something of the spirit is slipping away. A Ferrari F40 will set you back one-and-a-half million today, and not because it's a comfortable car.

 
#349 ·
Good thoughts!

My specialized HT rockhopper A1 Comp is the F40 of MTN bikes! ha ha! It's fast, light, handles like a dream and is intoxicating to ride! just like the F40. Compared to the full suspension 29ers of today which are like a new automatic corvette, yep their fast, BUUUUTTTTTT, they are soul'less!
 
#432 ·
Like many I ride 26" because that's what I have. The Kona Dawg and the Heckler (see sig) are both great bikes and set up nice but the Heckler is my #1. I'm a bit of a clyde (6-4/220lbs) so last frame I broke I was very focused on reliability and chose the Heckler based on it's tried and true, simple design. And I have not broken a frame since.

At the time, I was interested in trying a 29 but figured if spokes, swingarms, forks ect are all spaced out just a hair more in a 29 vs 26 they would be more likely to fail so I chose one of the toughest 26" bikes out there. I has not disappointed...I've worn out wheels, tranny, brakes, stem, seat, pivot bearings, etc. a few times but the frame is still rock solid.

But...time ticks on and I am making the move to the dark side. I have a 2018 Kona Process 153 on order (27.5) so I will soon be experiencing the 'big wheel' hoopla (get it...HOOP-la?).
 
#444 · (Edited)
Forgot to mention:

I have put my engineering degree to test and thought I should run the math before saying anything. People say big things about inertia but inertia alone doesn´t mean the full picture. Inertia only have a meaning when coupled with rotational speed. When you put the math together for rotational energy, which is what counts: power, there will be no difference on the wheel size because the radius that influence inertia values will be cancelled on the rotational speed equation. So it will come down to mass placement.

example: given two wheels, and the rim weight is exactly at 0.9 of the total radius, and they weight the same, no matter how big the rim is, the energy equation for that will be the same.

So fat tires might change things slightly as the rim will get proportionally inwards when compared to normal wheels. It will be good as the more centered the mass, the less energy it takes to rotate. however, fat tires are heavier so it might counter act things.

During my calculations, I´ve figured out that energy to rotate thes rims are something like 1/10th of the energy required to rotate the tires. So going tubeless and having reasonably light tires is the way to go. Spokes are 1/1000th of the tires so don´t mind if your wheel is heavy because of spokes. It is better to have a light rim with plenty of spokes than a heavy rim with less spokes. Both dinamically and structurally. Energy required to rotate the hubs are neglectible. its so small that you can consider it static weight.

Of course, rotating or not, every gram will have to be taken uphill and the work equation is mass times distance plus mass times gravity times height. divide them by time and you have power. Conclusion: if you have two riders with same power ability and same weight, completely equal, being one wiht a 20lbs bike and the other has a 30lbs bike. The lighter bike will take the podium as the total mass (rider+bike) is lesser.

26ers have the advantage of being lighter. two rims of same kind, two tires of same kind will always be lighter in 26er format than 29er format.

The next math topic comes into a different name: vibration. every time your bike chatter on the trail, every time it went up half an inch, the energy to lift the bike plus yourself came from the pedals. mass x gravity x height. that´s why we get slowed when things start vibrating. there are two ways to deal with that:
1 - bigger wheels
2 - good suspension

At this point, the conclusion is: good suspension trumps wheelsize. if youre tight on the budget, a cheap 29er will be more comfortable but heavier to pedal. a cheap 26er will be less comfortable and lighter to pedal.

an expensive 26er with good components will not let you down. So as an expensive 29er will also not let you down if you´re light rider and can deal the flexibility. cant be bigger and stiffer at same time. Smaller will always be stiffer. You can make the most of engineering th get a better stiffer 29er but the same technology applied to a 26er will render even better results.

When motorcycles remove the suspension or add locks to them, or move to bigger wheels, than we can review this topic. Meanwhile, the motorcycle wheels are smaller and they have good suspension.


more consideration on wheel sizes: small people get along on small bikes. big wheels on small bikes is the same as big bikes with small wheels. things are meant to be proportional. Look at the cars. big tires have more volume and help big heavy riders to run same pressure as small riders on small wheels. To me, small bikes, medium bikes, large bikes should all have proportional dimensions, with wheels getting bigger, chainstays getting bigger, wheelbase getting bigger, all in same proportion, ending up in similar handling regardless of size.
 
#486 ·
I'll be 47 years old 2 weeks after my third child is born at the end of this coming August. I'm getting back into mountain biking to start getting cardio exercise again and shed some pounds so I can keep up with these kids (1 son is incoming, 1 son is 3 years old, and my daughter will be 18 this year). Otherwise I'll be the lethargic old guy in his late 50's or early 60's when these boys are teenagers. I always used to need to be on top of the tech game with the latest & greatest toys but now priorities have changed. I enjoy things that have been with me for years or decades more than the latest & greatest shiny new toys. My Super V has been in a state of disassembly for weeks now and I need to get it back together so I can get riding!
 
#487 ·
Totally agree on the tried and true comment... and same here, I ride the bikes I have to get myself in shape, I'm not racing anyone, just trying to improve myself. Everything on my bikes works, there is no need for me to get any of the latest gadgets... and in any case they wouldn't even fit my bikes anymore. I did get several spare 26er parts when they were cheap to stock up... so I'll be good for a while. I'm hopeful that my 2 girls (2 and 6) will want to go riding on the trail with me... we shall see.
 
#491 ·
Thats the thing getting parts. I recently wanted to get some rim brake wheels...ugh that was a pain.

People say that you can still get this or that...and yes you can, if you look at the bottom end of the craptastic market, but I really don't want to put a low end boat anchor fork or some cheep heavy flexy rims on my top end frame that I love to bits, I want the good stuff.
You have to like hit up ebay for NOS that may or may be legit, or go 2nd hand which could get you something good, or get you someone else's old crap that needs a rebuild more than the stuff you're replacing.
On top of in these parts of the world, either people figure out early that there was going to be a demand for old parts, or they just wanted top dollar from the start, but stuff ain't cheap.
 
#492 ·
People say that you can still get this or that...and yes you can, if you look at the bottom end of the craptastic market...
I understand your point but the situation is not completely unreasonable. For example the rim-brake rims you're looking for, rim brakes have not been used on hi-end mountain bikes for a long time. What are you talking, over ten years? A lot of consumer products are no longer supported at that sort of age and many people would consider it a reasonable life span.

I hate waste myself and try to keep things running for as long as possible but it's hard to be too annoyed at the manufacturer for not making components that few people still want to buy. A few years ago Fox did a run of 26'' straight steerer forks with current tech in them specifically for guys like us. They were not cheap and I did wonder if they sold them all at full price. Most people with older 26'' bikes would not sink top money into a fork for them.
 
#503 · (Edited)
It's been a good long time since I posted my feelings about my 26" AMHT vs my 29+ AMHT...I did a head to head review elsewhere, but since my thread here popped back up, I thought I'd do a long term review follow-up.

When I first bought my Stache, my intention was to keep it stock. I've never kept a bike stock, so I don't know why I thought I could do it this time, hehehe. The Stache now is built very similar to the Komodo regarding fork travel, wheelset, BB height, CS length. I still love riding my 26, but I'll let my review do the rest of the talking:

I did an "Apples to Apples" (mangos to squash) comparison today of the 2005 vs 2017 in the hardtail mountain bike world.

Bicycle tire Bicycle frame Bicycle wheel Tire Wheel

Subject 1: 2005 Freeride Hardtail (which today translates as "All Mountain Hardtail")

28.5#, Hope Stans wheelset, 32x150mm Rockshox Sektor fork 1x10 drivetrain, 26x2.4" tires, disc brakes.
68' head angle, 425mm chainstays, 625mm effective top tube

Tire Wheel Bicycle wheel Bicycle tire Bicycle wheel rim

Subject 2: 2017 Trek Stache All Mountain Hardtail

28.75#, Hope Arc wheelset, 35x140mm Rockshox Yari fork, 1x11 drivetrain, 29x3" tires, disc brakes.
68' head angle, 420mm chainstays, 624 effective top tube.

Bicycle tire Tire Wheel Bicycle wheel rim Bicycle wheel

On paper, they look very similar except for the obvious wheel size difference. Almost like you altered one to fit the wheels of the other.

Same 6-8mi trail, same direction. Very technical in places, pretty steep in places.

Results: What a difference 12 years of technology makes. You'd think the only difference would be the ability of the 29x3 to roll over bumps, and the acceleration of the little 26x2.4 bike in the flats and smooth climbs, but I assure you...it goes much deeper than that.

There's really nothing Komodo tackles that the Stache doesn't do better. The clown-wheeled bike moters up to speed very quickly on the trail & handles just as nimble but much more stable. Comfortably climbs where the Komodo spins out or runs out of gas, (comfort issue) obviously tackles technical terrain without trying, whereas the Komodo's pilot must carefully choose his lines as not to destroy the nice wheelset or veer off trail.

There are sections that I clean on the Stache 100% of the time that I've never cleaned on my 26.

Every time I get ready to ride, it gets harder and harder to pull the Komodo down off the wall. It's still a fun ride, but what a difference!

Vegetation Helmet Forest Personal protective equipment Terrestrial plant


With the new Hope / Arc wheelset on the Stache, there's really no real life trail difference regarding how quickly it gets up to speed in comparison.

It climbs any trail with less effort, carves any curves more fun, descends and drops with more confidence.

26" will still get ridden. I still love my Kinesis baby. But as a long term 26" staunch hold-out... I'll eat Crow and say it is inferior in every way.

Though I still ride it.
Wheel Bicycle tire Bicycle frame Bicycle wheel Bicycle wheel rim
 
#507 ·
pilot must carefully choose his lines as not to destroy the nice wheelset or veer off trail.
This is why I love mountain biking. Learned on the technical east coast trails, and the challenge of making it on a difficult section was and is the appeal that brings me back. I get it, that for some it is speed, comfort, ease that matter more... but there are many ways of enjoying mountain biking (it has always been that way). It's just sad that the industry started to dictate what this sport should be like.
 
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top