Can we just call it 27.5?

Printable View

  • 05-21-2012
    krispy@go-ride.com
    Can we just call it 27.5?
    Hey all, after riding a sweet proto 27.5er the other day, and having owned a 5" travel 29er for a whole 3 weeks i'm really looking foreward to a mid sized wheelset on a 160ish travel do it all trailbike.

    I'm in a shop all day trying to explain what the heck 650b is and why. Can we just come up with a catchy name for it? :p

    I've been in this gig for 20 years now and i honestly don't know what 650b is. I did sell 26x1 3/8 and 27x1 1/4 Schwinns back in the day though :D

    I see Enve, Intense, Schwalbe and others are trying to use "27.5" Unless someone has a better name i'd say lets go with it.

    I'm going to start a bike brand called Sevener Because it just rolls off the tongue! Not. :band:
  • 05-21-2012
    IF52
    Do you know what 700c is?

    I'm for sticking with 650b, or just B.
  • 05-21-2012
    krispy@go-ride.com
    I would love to see the chart, or the history of 700c, 650a,b, and xyz as well.

    I see 700, 584 and 698, where is 650? 584 + a road tire? My point exactly.

  • 05-21-2012
    IF52
    I see 700 as a cyclocross tire, not a road tire where it is commonly used. Your point isn't much of one.

    5 years of so we've referred to it as 650b, and now we change because some people don't get it? Mountain bike was a brand name just like Kleenex and it stuck to an entire activity, mountains or not. Why not just let 650b, be.
  • 05-21-2012
    dinobiker
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by IF52 View Post
    Do you know what 700c is?

    I'm for sticking with 650b, or just B.

    I'm for B
  • 05-21-2012
    dhbomber
    I prefer 650b or six-fitty ;)
  • 05-21-2012
    dinobiker
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dhbomber View Post
    I prefer 650b or six-fitty ;)

    too many syllables
  • 05-21-2012
    Kristinka
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dhbomber View Post
    I prefer 650b or six-fitty ;)

    I like six-fifty too :)
  • 05-21-2012
    Morpheous
    ...not sure what the OP has been doing for 20 yrs and not know about standard wheel sizes....You are not going to find many if any shops that are in this realm yet, they are dependent on the industry. You can make your own 6" travel 650B bike today, I am on my third build in that category. Weyless 67, Jamis XAM2, now Santacruz Butcher.
  • 05-21-2012
    DJ Giggity
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by krispy@go-ride.com View Post
    I would love to see the chart, or the history of 700c, 650a,b, and xyz as well.

    I see 700, 584 and 698, where is 650? 584 + a road tire? My point exactly.


    650b is really old, something like 50-60 years. It was use in Europe for touring bikes so the the size comes from the rim diameter plus a larger touring tire. The rim size made a bit of a comeback in the late 80s/early 90s in the form of custom road bikes for small riders, women in particular. I don't know the exact dates but you get the general idea.
  • 05-21-2012
    Paul.C
    How about two seven point fiver? Or even six hundred fifty B 'er. Six five oh'er?
  • 05-22-2012
    fc
    I think the naming has had 5 years to bake. 27.5 has lost maybe cause it has a silly decimal point.

    The 650b ship has sailed and there's no turning back.

    fc
  • 05-22-2012
    SteveF
  • 05-22-2012
    lml427
    Twenty-seven half or 650b. I think twenty-seven half sounds more mtb and 650b more roady, but
    either is fine by me as long as they keep giving us more options.
  • 05-22-2012
    carverboy
    I prefer 650B over 27.5, It sounds a lot better to me. Funny thing is I can't quantify that opinion really.
    I think maybe it was introduced to me by that name way back when and anything else just sounds wrong.
  • 05-22-2012
    derby
    How about following motorcycle wheel sizing labels.... call the wheels by their rim sizes in inches, 22, 23, and 24.5.

    Whatever... 650b has a sophisticated sound to it... 27.5 would fit better for current sales sophistry ;)
  • 05-22-2012
    Jetman46
    Sixfifty B
  • 05-22-2012
    thad
    It would make much more sense to describe wheels with the rim size, because the tire diameter fluctucates so much due to tire size. 559mm, 584mm, and 622mm. Or even rounding to 56cm, 58cm, and 62cm. It may be too late for that.

    I think 27.5" is stupid. Doesn't sound good, and makes people think that the rim size exactly splits the difference between 26" + 29", when it is really much closer to 26".
  • 05-22-2012
    TheSchwagman
    Really? No offense to the OP or any of you, but who gives a rip? When we're all out on the trail, is it important at all what we call it?

    SHARP = SHutup And Ride Pal.
  • 05-22-2012
    mobaar
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    It would make much more sense to describe wheels with the rim size, because the tire diameter fluctucates so much due to tire size. 559mm, 584mm, and 622mm. Or even rounding to 56cm, 58cm, and 62cm. It may be too late for that.

    I think 27.5" is stupid. Doesn't sound good, and makes people think that the rim size exactly splits the difference between 26" + 29", when it is really much closer to 26".

    MUCH closer?

    559
    584 (+25mm/4.5%)
    622 (+38mm/6.5 %)

    I guess we need to switch to 650A (590mm BSD) to use 27.5"?

    Much like everything else 650b, its going to be the manufacturers that set the terms here, and 27.5 seems to be gaining traction from what I see.

    27.5" is easier to explain to the customer that doesn't have any idea what 650b is (26", 27.5", 29" makes more sense thatn 26", 650B, 29").

    It also prevents confusion with 650C (571mm BSD). 700c works because 700a, b, and d are all practically obsolete. 700B (635 BSD) tires are out there, but everyone calls them 28".
  • 05-22-2012
    rydbyk
    six fitty yo
  • 05-22-2012
    thad
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mobaar View Post
    MUCH closer?
    559
    584 (+25mm/4.5%)
    622 (+38mm/6.5 %)

    In comparison to 26":
    584/559= 1.0447 4.5% larger
    622/559= 1.1127 11.3% larger
  • 05-22-2012
    reformed roadie
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by francois View Post
    I think the naming has had 5 years to bake. 27.5 has lost maybe cause it has a silly decimal point.

    The 650b ship has sailed and there's no turning back.

    fc

    :thumbsup:

    The 27.5 names wreaks of MBA and their stupid aversion to the metric system...the whole world compares weights of bike parts in grams. Except MBA. WTS?

    (Yes, I get that 650b doesn't really mean anything.)
  • 05-22-2012
    mobaar
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    In comparison to 26":
    584/559= 1.0447 4.5% larger
    622/559= 1.1127 11.3% larger

    And? My point was that 650b is pretty close to the middle of 26/29. Saying its not close ENOUGH to call it 27.5 is pretty silly. Should we go with 27.16"?

    27.5" makes perfect sense in the overall scheme of 26" and 29" wheels/tires we have currently.
  • 05-22-2012
    thad
    Eh, my point is that 26" and 29 wheels are not actually 26/29 in diameter. Totally depends on tire size. 26 X 1.9 < 2.2 < 2.5 < 3.0
    So why not label the rim size, and the tire size, and then everything is accurate.

    If you must use some arbitrary inch size that is not accurate, 26", 27", 29" is closer.
  • 05-22-2012
    thad
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mobaar View Post
    And? My point was that 650b is pretty close to the middle of 26/29. Saying its not close ENOUGH to call it 27.5 is pretty silly. Should we go with 27.16"?

    27.5" makes perfect sense in the overall scheme of 26" and 29" wheels/tires we have currently.

    26 x 1.1127 = 28.93 rounds to 29"
    26 x 1.0447 = 27.16 rounds to 27"

    lose the point5.
  • 05-22-2012
    TheSchwagman
    For the sake of argument, I suggest we go with regular, medium, and wagon wheels.

    Or for the coffee addicts like myself, Tall, Grande & Venti.

    (OK, now I'm just being a troll)
  • 05-22-2012
    mobaar
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    Eh, my point is that 26" and 29 wheels are not actually 26/29 in diameter. Totally depends on tire size. 26 X 1.9 < 2.2 < 2.5 < 3.0
    So why not label the rim size, and the tire size, and then everything is accurate.

    If you must use some arbitrary inch size that is not accurate, 26", 27", 29" is closer.

    So your suggestion is to call 650b 27"? That would certainly clear everything right up.
  • 05-22-2012
    thad
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mobaar View Post
    So your suggestion is to call 650b 27"? That would certainly clear everything right up.

    My suggestion would be to call it by the actual rim size, rounded to cm.
    56cm =26", 58cm = 650b , 62cm = 29"

    26 and 29 are totally arbitrary numbers. I just measured my bikes
    26X 2.35 larsen TT = 26.5"
    26X 2.5 minion dhf = 27"
    29X 2.2 ikon = 29.5"
    29X 2.4 ardent = 29.75"
  • 05-22-2012
    mobaar
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    My suggestion would be to call it by the actual rim size, rounded to cm.
    56cm =26", 58cm = 650b , 62cm = 29"

    26 and 29 are totally arbitrary numbers. I just measured my bikes
    26X 2.35 larsen TT = 26.5"
    26X 2.5 minion dhf = 27"
    29X 2.2 ikon = 29.5"
    29X 2.4 ardent = 29.75"

    So your suggestion is to come up with a completely new system altogether? Even better....

    There are good arguments on both sides of 650b/27.5"

    There is no good argument for 27" or 58cm.

    26" and 29" are simply rough approximations. But they're rough approximations that everyone already understands. If you want to overthrow the system, don't come up with an equally dumb system (58cm??? seriously?).

    If you're claiming to want accuracy, just stick to actual BSD measurements. They're what really matter anyway.
  • 05-22-2012
    fc
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shocker View Post
    For the sake of argument, I suggest we go with regular, medium, and wagon wheels.

    Or for the coffee addicts like myself, Tall, Grande & Venti.

    (OK, now I'm just being a troll)

    :cornut: Post of the day bro!
  • 05-22-2012
    thad
    What? That is the BSD, rounded to CM. It accurately describes the size, is a measurement that is already used (though not marketed). This would also continue to move the bike industry toward complete use of the metric system.

    BSD 559mm = 56cm or 26"
    BSD 584mm = 58cm or 26 x 1.0447 = 27.16 rounds to 27"
    BSD 622mm = 62cm or 26 x 1.1127 = 28.93 rounds to 29"

    If you want a "rough" estimate of wheel size in inches, 27" is a closer description than 27.5" and doesn't sound stupid.
  • 05-22-2012
    Trail Wizard
    I'm wondering what year in the distant (or not so distant) future the 650a (590 BSD) movement will happen.

    Kirk Pacenti mentioned he considered going the 650a route, but ultimately went with 650b for various reasons.
    I'm thinking he went with 650b because 650a sounds too Canadian.

    How about we use a secret lingo code name for 650b, named after the county that uses area code 650, which is San Mateo County, which also happens to be where Tom Ritchey resides, which also happens to be where Ritchey built 650b mountain bikes in the late 70s or early 80s, before the Russian army bought up the Hakka tire supply. And now, Ritchey is working on his own 650b tires and wheels, so things are coming full-circle..... just like a wheel.

    So, how 'bout we start calling them San Mateos?

    Or how about b'ers (pronounced beers)?

    Also, 2013 will be a rather banner year for 650b, and if you squish the 1 and the 3 close together, it looks like a B? So, there's been twenty-sixers, twenty-niners, and now twenty-B'ers (20B / 2013). Twenty beers? That's a lot of beers, eh? That reminds me of the time that I found a mouse in a bottle of beer, eh?
    So, maybe they could also be referred to as 20B. Or 65013.

    Oh, and here's the Canadian skit from Family Guy, eh?
    Family Guy - AA eh High Quality HD - YouTube

    Bonus Strange Brew video:
    Strange Brew - mouse in a bottle - YouTube
  • 05-22-2012
    DJ Giggity
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shocker View Post
    Or for the coffee addicts like myself, Tall, Grande & Venti.

    I blame you when I see this in MBA next month.
  • 05-22-2012
    StiHacka
    This is just like staring a high school garage metal band - the toughest part is to figure out how to call the product. :D I like 650b or just plain "B", or Grande. ;)

    PS: Venti-niners sounds about right. /me running for cover
  • 05-22-2012
    StiHacka
    One more side note - I find it easier to run searches for 650b than for 27.5, 27 1/2", 27 1/2in, etc.
  • 05-22-2012
    jack lantern
    27 makes me think of 27 x 1-1/4 tires, and what do we think of when we think of those: mounting cheap a** wire bead gumwalls on to cheap a** 40 year old steel rims that feel like they're gonna buckle on you while you're trying to seat the bead. The guys at work refer to my bike as "the B bike", but I prefer 650b. Why try to fit it into other wheel sizes format? Stand apart.
  • 05-22-2012
    jack lantern
    BTW, as a side note I spoke to someone at WTB today and they said they will be offering the Frequency rim in 650b as well as at least two other tires in the not too distant future.

    :thumbsup:
  • 05-22-2012
    Trail Wizard
    I spoke with a Specialized sales rep last week and he said they might have a tire next year, and the soonest they'll have a bike is 2014 or 2015. He said they wished they hadn't continued with many of their current 26ers, and they wished they had pursued 650b for those equivalent models instead.
  • 05-22-2012
    mobaar
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    What? That is the BSD, rounded to CM. It accurately describes the size, is a measurement that is already used (though not marketed). This would also continue to move the bike industry toward complete use of the metric system.

    BSD 559mm = 56cm or 26"
    BSD 584mm = 58cm or 26 x 1.0447 = 27.16 rounds to 27"
    BSD 622mm = 62cm or 26 x 1.1127 = 28.93 rounds to 29"

    If you want a "rough" estimate of wheel size in inches, 27" is a closer description than 27.5" and doesn't sound stupid.

    Right... rounded BSD... which would be totally new nomenclature and nobody would have any idea what you're talking about. If you're using BSD, why dumb it down? Just use the actual BSD.

    And you keep going back to 27" which is the worst idea in this entire thread. You do realize there is a widely accepted 27" tire/wheel size and it uses a larger BSD than 29ers, right?
  • 05-22-2012
    r1Gel
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Trail Wizard View Post
    I'm wondering what year in the distant (or not so distant) future the 650a (590 BSD) movement will happen.

    Kirk Pacenti mentioned he considered going the 650a route, but ultimately went with 650b for various reasons.
    I'm thinking he went with 650b because 650a sounds too Canadian.

    How about we use a secret lingo code name for 650b, named after the county that uses area code 650, which is San Mateo County, which also happens to be where Tom Ritchey resides, which also happens to be where Ritchey built 650b mountain bikes in the late 70s or early 80s, before the Russian army bought up the Hakka tire supply. And now, Ritchey is working on his own 650b tires and wheels, so things are coming full-circle..... just like a wheel.

    So, how 'bout we start calling them San Mateos?

    Or how about b'ers (pronounced beers)?

    Also, 2013 will be a rather banner year for 650b, and if you squish the 1 and the 3 close together, it looks like a B? So, there's been twenty-sixers, twenty-niners, and now twenty-B'ers (20B / 2013). Twenty beers? That's a lot of beers, eh? That reminds me of the time that I found a mouse in a bottle of beer, eh?
    So, maybe they could also be referred to as 20B. Or 65013.

    Oh, and here's the Canadian skit from Family Guy, eh?
    Family Guy - AA eh High Quality HD - YouTube

    Bonus Strange Brew video:
    Strange Brew - mouse in a bottle - YouTube

    Haha! Like :thumbsup:
  • 05-22-2012
    thad
    Who pissed in your wheaties? It's a wheel size....

    Of course I am familiar with 27" 10 speed wheels. You do realize there a 26X 1 3/8 wheel, that are completely different than 26X 1 1/4", that are completely different than 26"X1.5" mtb wheels? You do realize there are 650c rims that are different than 650b? Rims and tires have been a confusing mess in cycling, since forever. Which is why, I think they should move away from arbitrary inch measurements like 26" and 29", and move to ERD.

    I don't think most people are so concerned about their rim size they need to memorize it with accuracy down to the millimeter. I like nice even numbers.
  • 05-22-2012
    thrasher_s
    I say 26er, tweener, and 29er.
  • 05-22-2012
    Trail Addict
    I agree with just calling it 27.5.

    When someone says 650b it sounds like they're talking about a ghey motorcycle.
  • 05-22-2012
    Morpheous
    Just call it the 'right stuff', cause the other two sizes will fade into the sunset. This wheelsize is just what the industry needs and will spawn a huge bulge in some of the most profitable areas in cycling (tries & wheels). New frame designs will abound, plus the fact that you can retro fit them to 26er frames is a boon.:thumbsup: It will be fun next season. Wait till the DHers get 650b going.
  • 05-22-2012
    doismellbacon
    It should remain 650b because that's what its inventors called it.... show some respect for history you dingleberries.

    As far as short hand nicknames go, I'm with Trail Wizard..... B'ers.... I like B'ers
  • 05-23-2012
    dwt
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    It would make much more sense to describe wheels with the rim size, because the tire diameter fluctucates so much due to tire size. 559mm, 584mm, and 622mm. Or even rounding to 56cm, 58cm, and 62cm. It may be too late for that.

    I think 27.5" is stupid. Doesn't sound good, and makes people think that the rim size exactly splits the difference between 26" + 29", when it is really much closer to 26".

    Totally don't get that or agree. For over 20 years, the industry has dubbed the "regular" wheel size as 26" which is the outside diameter of the wheel with tire mounted and inflated measured in inches. Same with 29" for over 10 years. Nobody gave or gives a damn that certain tires make the wheels slightly taller or slighly shorter than the demonination.

    Now we have the in bewtween size, and people arguing that by using IDO/bsd metric measurements ( which NOBODY f'ing gets and which compares imperial apples to metric ISO oranges) the new wheel is closer to 26" than 29".

    I say B.S. I have 4 "650b" wheels , different tire brands, different widths mounted on different rims. They all measure close to exactly 27.5 inches using a level and a yardstick.

    This is a Neomoto 2.1 mounted on a WTB Laser Disc Trail rim.





    Why confuse the public? It is MUCH simpler and NOT inaccurate to to market the wheel as exactly halfway between 26" and 29", comparing apples to apples: OD measured in inches with tire mounted and inflated.

    Getting all metric and ISO is a bunch of meaningless insider sounding technical jargon AFAIC, and all it will do is confuse and mislead consumers and inhibit the acceptance of the middle wheel size.

    Just say 27.5" - halfway between 26" and 29" - and be DONE with it.
  • 05-23-2012
    KCOgar
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Trail Wizard View Post
    I spoke with a Specialized sales rep last week and he said they might have a tire next year, and the soonest they'll have a bike is 2014 or 2015. He said they wished they hadn't continued with many of their current 26ers, and they wished they had pursued 650b for those equivalent models instead.

    If this is true....well then....crap. I was kinda hoping big S was throwing up a smoke screen and was going to dazzle us in 2013. Even though I secretly suspected that they would do what they did w/29ers -- wait & see what the market does before jumping in w/both feet.

    Here in the midwest it's easy to get a bike from your LBS as long as you want Specialized or Giant* ("we play both kinds of music -- country AND western"). Now my hopes of an HL 650b-specific trail bike lie solely on Norco. The good news is that the closest Norco dealer is only 700+ miles away.....

    *I know I can get other bikes here in the midwest...it was an attempt at humor. How does that saying go? If you have to explain it....
  • 05-23-2012
    dwt
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mobaar View Post
    And? My point was that 650b is pretty close to the middle of 26/29. Saying its not close ENOUGH to call it 27.5 is pretty silly. Should we go with 27.16"?

    27.5" makes perfect sense in the overall scheme of 26" and 29" wheels/tires we have currently.

    +1:thumbsup:
  • 05-23-2012
    dwt
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    26 x 1.1127 = 28.93 rounds to 29"
    26 x 1.0447 = 27.16 rounds to 27"

    lose the point5.

    Nope.
  • 05-23-2012
    Axe
    27.5 should be left for 650a. Now that we have 650b forks and frames, we can hand sew and fit 650a tires in them.

    Just the last step to the perfect optimum.
  • 05-23-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shocker View Post
    Or for the coffee addicts like myself, Tall, Grande & Venti.

    "Coffee addict" and Starbucks nomenclature do not mesh. ;)
  • 05-23-2012
    dwt
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    27.5 should be left for 650a. Now that we have 650b forks and frames, we can hand sew and fit 650a tires in them.

    Just the last step to the perfect optimum.

    GREAT IDEA. Make it even MORE complicated and confusing.

    I'm, a 'Merican. Don't speak no metric. Don't need no fancy talking bike eleitist tellin' me bout no ISO, bsd, and other useless crap. Gimme an SAE Tape measure, same as the 26'ers and 29'ers use.
  • 05-23-2012
    TheSchwagman
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    "Coffee addict" and Starbucks nomenclature do not mesh. ;)

    Ouch. :blush:
  • 05-23-2012
    TNC
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DJ Giggity View Post
    650b is really old, something like 50-60 years. It was use in Europe for touring bikes so the the size comes from the rim diameter plus a larger touring tire. The rim size made a bit of a comeback in the late 80s/early 90s in the form of custom road bikes for small riders, women in particular. I don't know the exact dates but you get the general idea.

    DJ, are you sure about the comeback of 650B in the 80's/90's? The venue you're describing there strikes me as the 650C size that was really popular during that time frame for triathalon and small framed roadbikes. Trek even made some models with 650C wheels in their smaller framed roadbikes up to 2000 or thereabouts. Not that this is important, but it's an interesting trivia issue.
  • 05-23-2012
    trailbildr
    Yeah, Terry, Trek, Cannondale, TT bikes, Spec'd... 650c wheels were popular back in the 1990s on the road, not 650b.

    mk
  • 05-23-2012
    DJ Giggity
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TNC View Post
    DJ, are you sure about the comeback of 650B in the 80's/90's? The venue you're describing there strikes me as the 650C size that was really popular during that time frame for triathalon and small framed roadbikes. Trek even made some models with 650C wheels in their smaller framed roadbikes up to 2000 or thereabouts. Not that this is important, but it's an interesting trivia issue.

    I thought they were but it sounds like I was wrong on that. It's not the first time.
  • 05-23-2012
    Trail Wizard
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    27.5 should be left for 650a. Now that we have 650b forks and frames, we can hand sew and fit 650a tires in them.

    Just the last step to the perfect optimum.

    I've been looking into the distant (or not-so-distant) future, and I'm planning a preemptive strike on the 650a movement. My wheel size will split the difference between 650b (584 BSD) and 650a (590 BSD) and be right at 587 BSD. A happy medium between the two.
    As for what letter I'll use to designate the size.....

    650d might be confusing and dangerous for dyslexics who might try mounting 650d tires onto 650b wheels, or vise versa.
    650e sounds too much like 650.
    650f sounds like a failing school grade, and would be the brunt of trolls' jokes.
    650g sounds too much like a monetary amount or a weight in grams, which could be confusing to people when they see the same thing on both wide and narrow tires.
    650h might look like 650b if there's a bit of mud on the tire.
    650i looks and sounds too much like a BMW. Oh wait.... that's because it is a BMW.
    650j looks too much like 650i.
    650k, again, sounds too much like a monetary amount.
    650l looks too much like six thousand, five hundred and one.
    650m looks and sounds right. The m will stand for medium, even though most people will presume it stands for mighty or magnificent. I might just make it a capital M.
    Okay, so that's it...... 650m, or 650M, with a 587 BSD.

    One of the nice things about my new wheel size is it will be compatible with practically all 650b and 650a frames and forks.
  • 05-23-2012
    bigfruits
    calling them 27.5 might bring sales up as new buyers will think "medium. cool. ill get that" which would then get companys to dump more money into it and more 27.5er frames will be made!

    sorry if something similar has been mentioned. didnt have time to read the thread.
  • 05-23-2012
    krispy@go-ride.com
    Steve F,

    Thanks for the link to Sheldon Brown's tire sizing chart, i should have known to look there!

    I didn't expect a good answer to my thread, i am simply trying to make this new wheel size easier to understand, and sell because i think it is an excellent option for most riders out there.

    Krispy
  • 05-23-2012
    thad
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    Why confuse the public? It is MUCH simpler and NOT inaccurate to to market the wheel as exactly halfway between 26" and 29", comparing apples to apples: OD measured in inches with tire mounted and inflated.

    My MAIN point, (do ALL CAPS help you understand better?:rolleyes:) is that 650b is not exactly halfway between 26" and 29". It is closer to 26" than it is to 29".

    26x 2.3 larsen TT = 26.5"
    650bx 2.1 neomoto = 27.5"
    29x 2.2 ikon = 29.5"

    650b is 1" larger than 26". 29" is 2" larger than 650b. 650b is not exactly in the middle, it's much closer to 26".

    559mm = 56cm
    584mm = 58cm +2cm
    622mm= 62cm +4cm

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    Totally don't get that or agree. For over 20 years, the industry has dubbed the "regular" wheel size as 26" which is the outside diameter of the wheel with tire mounted and inflated measured in inches. Same with 29" for over 10 years. Nobody gave or gives a damn that certain tires make the wheels slightly taller or slighly shorter than the demonination.

    Now we have the in bewtween size, and people arguing that by using IDO/bsd metric measurements ( which NOBODY f'ing gets and which compares imperial apples to metric ISO oranges) the new wheel is closer to 26" than 29".

    I going to use those BSD numbers again to try to explain why 26" and 29" are confusing, as well.
    26" rim has bsd 559mm = 22.0" Wheels are 26" with a tire that is 2.0" from bead to tread.
    650b bsd 584mm = 23.0" Wheels are 27.5 with a tire that is 2.25"
    29" bsd 622mm = 24.5" Wheels are 29" with a tire that is 2.25"

    Maybe we should just change 26" to 26.5" to make it understandable. No, it make A LOT more sense to leave the traditional 26", 650b, 29" labels, but supplement them with the BSD. How does informing the customer on the ACTUAL diameter of their rims confuse them? This approach has been taken elsewhere in the industry. Initially supplementing the old school, confusing, but accepted terms, with new ones that are more descriptive. When was the last time you saw suspension travel or bar width measured in imperial? Top tube and eff top tube lengths are slowly making way for the more descriptive and accurate front center.

    How do car and motorcycles measure their wheels and tires? They state the actual rim size. And then the size of the tire. I don't think this would be such a hard transition...

    Here's what Sheldon Brown had to say on the subject:
    "As if bicycle tire sizing wasn't already confusing enough, wrong-headed marketeers have recently tried to popularize a fourth designation for the 584 mm tire size!

    They are trying to get people to call it "27 five." I strongly urge readers to resist this foolish jargon, and to use either the traditional "650B" designation, or, better yet, the internationally-standardized "584 mm" designation."
    650B (584 mm) Conversions for Road Bikes
  • 05-23-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    My MAIN point, (do ALL CAPS help you understand better?:rolleyes:) is that 650b is not exactly halfway between 26" and 29". It is closer to 26" than it is to 29".

    It is APPROXIMATELY half-way.

    That is GOOD ENOUGH.

    P.S. I think it should be called 584bs. But - in my garage I have 12", 14", 16", 20", 24", 26", 29" wheels. Inch based naming convention is kind of stuck. It ain't no road bike.
  • 05-23-2012
    thad
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    It is APPROXIMATELY half-way.

    No, it is approximately a third of the way.....

    That is GOOD ENOUGH.:thumbsup::madman:
  • 05-23-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    No, it is approximately a third of the way.....

    That is GOOD ENOUGH.:thumbsup::madman:

    No, it is approximately half way. It is IN BETWEEN.
  • 05-23-2012
    thad
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    No, it is approximately half way. It is IN BETWEEN.

    The difference between 29 and 26 is 622mm - 559mm = 63mm.

    1/3 larger is 21mm.
    1/2 larger is 31.5mm

    650b is 25mm bigger than 26". Is that closer to a third or a half?

    If you insist on being all vague about it: 650b is a little bit bigger than 26". 29" is quite a bit bigger than 650b.
  • 05-23-2012
    dwt
    27.5 is exactly in the middle AFAIC. . Which is why an Intense Tracer 275 could be my next bike. Because Intense is pretty much alone in adopting the SAE number. But before any of the engineers here jump ugly on them, they hedge a little by saying: "kinda in between maybe the best of both."
    That "kinda" gives them wiggle room if the ISO Inquisitors bring out the thumbscrews.

    650b « Engage
  • 05-23-2012
    IF52
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TNC View Post
    DJ, are you sure about the comeback of 650B in the 80's/90's? The venue you're describing there strikes me as the 650C size that was really popular during that time frame for triathalon and small framed roadbikes. Trek even made some models with 650C wheels in their smaller framed roadbikes up to 2000 or thereabouts. Not that this is important, but it's an interesting trivia issue.


    IIRC, Raleigh and somebody else used 650b on a few mtn bike models in the early to mid 80s. Didn't really take off so they dropped the size. That was after Tom Ritchey experimented with the size.
  • 05-23-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    650b is 25mm bigger than 26". Is that closer to a third or a half?

    If you insist on being all vague about it: 650b is a little bit bigger than 26". 29" is quite a bit bigger than 650b.

    It is even closer to 13/32.

    It is you who is being vague. 4.5% and 6.5% are NOT a "little bit" and a "quite a bit". That is silly to state it that way.
  • 05-23-2012
    jimbowho
    I bought a "Beasley" and really having a blast on it! I think the B will be a cool and endless play on words for years to come. (or-not). Like say a Specialized B-four, 4"travel. Kona Yawanabe. Cannondale behave. Santa Cruz b-groovy. Stupid but my point made. 27.5 suks bong water.

    Don't make me PM DC, I'll sick him on you B-otches.
  • 05-24-2012
    Trail Addict
    I bet the people that decided to name it 650b are laughing at the guys arguing back and forth about the exact mathematical size of the wheel in this thread.
  • 05-24-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Trail Addict View Post
    I bet the people that decided to name it 650b are laughing at the guys arguing back and forth about the exact mathematical size of the wheel in this thread.

    Those people are probably long dead.

    There is ISO 5775 standard. It should be named 584.


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ISO 5775
    The standard diameters of straight-side and crochet-type rims are:

    194, 203, 222, 239, 248, 251, 279, 288, 298, 305, 317, 330, 337, 340, 349, 355, 357, 369, 381, 387, 390, 400, 406, 419, 428, 432, 438, 440, 451, 484, 489, 490, 498, 501, 507, 520, 531, 534, 540, 541, 547, 559, 565, 571, 584, 590, 597, 609, 622, 630, 635, 642

  • 05-24-2012
    Axe
    .. or, better yet, just call'em Medium.

    (Kids S-M-L are 16- 20-24). Adult S-M-L - 26 - 650b - 29.
  • 05-24-2012
    bigfruits
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    .. or, better yet, just call'em Medium.

    (Kids S-M-L are 16- 20-24). Adult S-M-L - 26 - 650b - 29.

    the bmx guys would be pissed if they had to buy kids tires!
  • 05-24-2012
    turnerbikes
    28
    If we are going to go the SAE direction lets call it 28" which is about the size of the tires most will actually ride in a year or 2 when the product in development now hits. Trying to squeeze middy sized wheels in frames not designed for them will drop off dramatically and the tire makers will have pulled their heads and opened some molds, the sun will come out and the birds will sing the dark age of being forced to choose from only 2 sizes will have passed, hooraah. When comparing OD's, we should also be looking at the same tire cross section for each rim size and when that is taken into consideration a 2.35 Schwalbe is 713mm or so, depending on air pressure, humidity in the air, which day it was made blah blah blah. That number happens to be what the fork makers are figuring for mud and safety clearance as well, so I expect a plethora of choices in this diameter by the end of 2012. When the middle wheel size hits everyone smack in the forehead, my guess is that a vast majority will not be buying 2,1.s but 2.3/5s and therefore the OD will measure 28" OD. Why cant we give it a name instead of a number though? 26 as almost everyone in the last 20 years rides, does not measure 26, and as soon as the tire makers made more and more 29r tires the OD jumped, so lets come up with some new names?! Instead of Small for 20s we could call them Slash for their superior edge to edge handling.
    M for 26" as they are certainly still the Most common or al'most the right size. L for 28s, as in ? the Logical choice for mtb? I don't think the twenty niner riders will mind known as those turning XLs. Just a thought.

    DT
  • 05-24-2012
    mobaar
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    650b is 1" larger than 26". 29" is 2" larger than 650b. 650b is not exactly in the middle, it's much closer to 26".

    559mm = 56cm
    584mm = 58cm +2cm
    622mm= 62cm +4cm

    This might be the best post yet. Intentionally rounding wrong to try and make your point.

    559 to 584 = 2.5cm (if you insist on even cm, then its 3, not 2)
    584 to 622 = 3.8cm

    So you're trying to make a 1.3cm (3.8 vs 2.5) difference into a 2cm (4 vs 2) difference with bad math. Good job.
  • 05-24-2012
    dwt
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    If we are going to go the SAE direction lets call it 28" which is about the size of the tires most will actually ride in a year or 2 when the product in development now hits. Trying to squeeze middy sized wheels in frames not designed for them will drop off dramatically and the tire makers will have pulled their heads and opened some molds, the sun will come out and the birds will sing the dark age of being forced to choose from only 2 sizes will have passed, hooraah. When comparing OD's, we should also be looking at the same tire cross section for each rim size and when that is taken into consideration a 2.35 Schwalbe is 713mm or so, depending on air pressure, humidity in the air, which day it was made blah blah blah. That number happens to be what the fork makers are figuring for mud and safety clearance as well, so I expect a plethora of choices in this diameter by the end of 2012. When the middle wheel size hits everyone smack in the forehead, my guess is that a vast majority will not be buying 2,1.s but 2.3/5s and therefore the OD will measure 28" OD. Why cant we give it a name instead of a number though? 26 as almost everyone in the last 20 years rides, does not measure 26, and as soon as the tire makers made more and more 29r tires the OD jumped, so lets come up with some new names?! Instead of Small for 20s we could call them Slash for their superior edge to edge handling.
    M for 26" as they are certainly still the Most common or al'most the right size. L for 28s, as in ? the Logical choice for mtb? I don't think the twenty niner riders will mind known as those turning XLs. Just a thought.

    DT

    Mr. Turner: I'll believe you when I see a Sultan 28". What wheels and tires would you spec to get there?
  • 05-24-2012
    doismellbacon
    Well, since he mentioned 2.35 Schwalbe's, that would be a pretty good guess
  • 05-24-2012
    Kirk Pacenti
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by turnerbikes View Post
    If we are going to go the SAE direction lets call it 28" which is about the size of the tires most will actually ride in a year or 2 when the product in development now hits. Trying to squeeze middy sized wheels in frames not designed for them will drop off dramatically and the tire makers will have pulled their heads and opened some molds, the sun will come out and the birds will sing the dark age of being forced to choose from only 2 sizes will have passed, hooraah. When comparing OD's, we should also be looking at the same tire cross section for each rim size and when that is taken into consideration a 2.35 Schwalbe is 713mm or so, depending on air pressure, humidity in the air, which day it was made blah blah blah. That number happens to be what the fork makers are figuring for mud and safety clearance as well, so I expect a plethora of choices in this diameter by the end of 2012. When the middle wheel size hits everyone smack in the forehead, my guess is that a vast majority will not be buying 2,1.s but 2.3/5s and therefore the OD will measure 28" OD. Why cant we give it a name instead of a number though? 26 as almost everyone in the last 20 years rides, does not measure 26, and as soon as the tire makers made more and more 29r tires the OD jumped, so lets come up with some new names?! Instead of Small for 20s we could call them Slash for their superior edge to edge handling.
    M for 26" as they are certainly still the Most common or al'most the right size. L for 28s, as in ? the Logical choice for mtb? I don't think the twenty niner riders will mind known as those turning XLs. Just a thought.

    DT

    I could live with 28 or "L". Ironically, I think that's what Wes Williams was shooting for (28") when he started building mountain bikes with 700c rims.

    Cheers,
    KP
  • 05-24-2012
    yetimeister514
    This thread banter has become an interesting 650b vs 27.5 discussion. And entertaining !

    Really loved the rounding wrong and then arguing your point. Spot on from mobaar. :thumbsup:

    and by far the best from jimboho :
    "Don't make me PM DC, I'll sick him on you B-otches" :nono:

    FWIW - Stick with the 650b. And forget the comparison to those 29er wagon wheels !
  • 05-24-2012
    mobaar
    Please no 28". For the same reason as no 27". It already exists. Still a lot of Euro's (Germans?) calling 700c 28", and then the Belgian's calling 635 BSD 28" too. We definitely don't need a 3rd 28" label.
  • 05-24-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bigfruits View Post
    the bmx guys would be pissed if they had to buy kids tires!

    Is it a bad thing?
  • 05-24-2012
    derby
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    Mr. Turner: i'll beieve you when I see a Sultan 28". What where's and tires would you spec to get there?

    Kirk Pacenti's 650b Mega-moto tires are 28", currently in prototype testing now.

    Yes with 28" maxi volume 650b tires, frame designers could continue to offer 2 frame types. Tweaked slightly if any, one long chain-stay frame type for fitting both 650b wheels and 28"max size tires or common 29'er wheels and tires, and another compact frame type for fitting both current 26" wheels and tires and smaller volume 650b wheels and tires, already well proven for 5 years now to work excellently in the same "26" inch frames converted to 650b. More choices for more riding conditions. :thumbsup:

    IMO, Kirk Pacenti nailed the Tail/AM rim and tire size combo for 650b (23"/584mm) rims right out of the box in 2007 for use in some compact nimble handling "26" inch frames with his pioneering 650b mountain bike tire, the 2.3 Neo-moto. Not heavy, very durable, easy rolling, and high grip predictable handling. Works great from Moab and Arizona's rocks, Oregon rain forest loam, to SoCal's packed sandy dirt. :thumbsup::thumbsup:
  • 05-24-2012
    dwt
    I
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mobaar View Post
    Please no 28". For the same reason as no 27". It already exists. Still a lot of Euro's (Germans?) calling 700c 28", and then the Belgian's calling 635 BSD 28" too. We definitely don't need a 3rd 28" label.

    Correct. Which is another reason to stck with SAE when measuring wheel size and not bringing ISO in at all. This is not an argument against metric. It's just avoid confusion. I have no problem describing my bike as having 27.5" wheels, 140mm of travel, and weighing 29 lbs. I do have problem with the argument that my wheels slightly less or slightly more than halfway between the other two wheel sizes. A logical and fact based Argument ccan be made that ether are exactly halfway between.


    ---
    I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?avdu5v
  • 05-24-2012
    reformed roadie
    OH, for Christsakes...
    I just read the latest MBA FS wheels size ad, I mean shootout between KHS bikes and they have started referring to it as (cringe) "Killer B".

    For the love of God, was "Black Diamond bikes" not bad enough?

    Can we accept the metric system?


    Why do I keep reading this rag?
  • 05-24-2012
    r1Gel
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by reformed roadie View Post
    MBA


    Why do I keep reading this rag?

    Good question :p
  • 05-24-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by reformed roadie View Post
    I just read the latest MBA FS wheels size ad, I mean shootout between KHS bikes and they have started referring to it as (cringe) "Killer B".

    For the love of God, was "Black Diamond bikes" not bad enough?

    Can we accept the metric system?


    Why do I keep reading this rag?

    No idea. I accept imperial measures for things where it is well established - frame sizing for example. But quoting component weight in ounces is borderline asinine. Nobody weights their tires in ounces.
  • 05-25-2012
    DeeEight
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thad View Post
    My suggestion would be to call it by the actual rim size, rounded to cm.
    56cm =26", 58cm = 650b , 62cm = 29"

    26 and 29 are totally arbitrary numbers. I just measured my bikes
    26X 2.35 larsen TT = 26.5"
    26X 2.5 minion dhf = 27"
    29X 2.2 ikon = 29.5"
    29X 2.4 ardent = 29.75"

    Then the actual rim sizes are 22", 23", and 24.5" rounded to the nearest half inch.
  • 05-25-2012
    jeff
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Trail Wizard View Post
    I'm wondering what year in the distant (or not so distant) future the 650a (590 BSD) movement will happen.

    Kirk Pacenti mentioned he considered going the 650a route, but ultimately went with 650b for various reasons.
    I'm thinking he went with 650b because 650a sounds too Canadian.

    How about we use a secret lingo code name for 650b, named after the county that uses area code 650, which is San Mateo County, which also happens to be where Tom Ritchey resides, which also happens to be where Ritchey built 650b mountain bikes in the late 70s or early 80s, before the Russian army bought up the Hakka tire supply. And now, Ritchey is working on his own 650b tires and wheels, so things are coming full-circle..... just like a wheel.

    So, how 'bout we start calling them San Mateos?

    Or how about b'ers (pronounced beers)?

    Also, 2013 will be a rather banner year for 650b, and if you squish the 1 and the 3 close together, it looks like a B? So, there's been twenty-sixers, twenty-niners, and now twenty-B'ers (20B / 2013). Twenty beers? That's a lot of beers, eh? That reminds me of the time that I found a mouse in a bottle of beer, eh?
    So, maybe they could also be referred to as 20B. Or 65013.

    Oh, and here's the Canadian skit from Family Guy, eh?
    Family Guy - AA eh High Quality HD - YouTube

    Bonus Strange Brew video:
    Strange Brew - mouse in a bottle - YouTube

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    That's funny shyt right there.
  • 05-25-2012
    jeff
    How about Tweener? Fits right in there.
  • 05-25-2012
    dwt
    This exchange nails it AFAIC:


    Quote:

    Q.: Mountain Bike Mag:

    The term “650b” is an established standard going back decades, and 27.5-inch, while descriptive and fitting within the 26-inch and 29er naming convention, is sort of a made-up standard. Which one do you think the industry should adopt?

    A:Scott Sports marketing director Adrian Montgomery:

    In this crazy mix up of standards I think we should look ahead to the potential buyers and the retail conversation and continue with the same units of measurement for the entire MTB category. Inches. Period. 26, 27.5, 29—these are all the same unit of measure. Don’t start skipping back and forth between European units that are comfortable in road bikes. This would create a larger problem like convincing the U.S. to adopt the metric system. I’m kidding…but seriously.
  • 05-25-2012
    Trail Addict
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    .. or, better yet, just call'em Medium.

    I'll go with that. :thumbsup:
  • 05-25-2012
    dwt
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Trail Addict View Post
    I'll go with that. :thumbsup:

    This Forum "owns" the brand. ;) let's vote on the nominations and let the bike industry know. :D In deference to American Intense and Euro Scott, I nominate "twenty seven fifty" or "twoseven point five" or even "twoseven dot five. If Scott agrees to steer clear ofroadie ISO, who are a bunch of Yanks to argue for Sixfiddy?
  • 05-25-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dwt View Post
    This Forum "owns" the brand. ;) let's vote on the nominations and let the bike industry know. :D In deference to American Intense and Euro Scott, I nominate "twenty seven fifty" or "twoseven point five" or even "twoseven dot five. If Scott agrees to steer clear ofroadie ISO, who are a bunch of Yanks to argue for Sixfiddy?

    To be honest, I do expect that 26" wheels will go the way of 1" headsets. 650b fits long travel frames and small full suspension frames with much less troubles than 29r, and even 29rs can be made to work there. And they should be stiff enough for DH. Well, I guess the double ply 3lb+ tires, direct mount stem bikes will still want 26" (or 24" rear).

    But it does seem to me that 27.5 naming is inevitable for MTB tires. Too bad, should have reserved that to 650a. :D
  • 05-25-2012
    StiHacka
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    But it does seem to me that 27.5 naming is inevitable for MTB tires.

    Please someone tell Schwalbe that naming theirs 27 1/2" is creative but it makes them harder to find using search at retailers' sites.
  • 05-25-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by StiHacka View Post
    Please someone tell Schwalbe that naming theirs 27 1/2" is creative but it makes them harder to find using search at retailers' sites.

    Well, if we follow SAE style, 27 1/2" is appropriate, is not it?
  • 05-25-2012
    StiHacka
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    Well, if we follow SAE style, 27 1/2" is appropriate, is not it?

    I do not care about styles that much.
  • 05-25-2012
    Albitron
    How about 27ish
  • 05-25-2012
    Axe
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by StiHacka View Post
    I do not care about styles that much.

    It is all about style, man. All about style. And ease.

    Steeze, if you may.
  • 05-25-2012
    Trail Wizard
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by reformed roadie View Post
    and they have started referring to it as (cringe) "Killer B".

    In the made-for-TV movie about mountain bike wheels, DC will be played by Nicolas Cage. This video showcases what some, most, or all of DC's scenes will sound like:

    Not the Bees - YouTube

    As it has been mentioned before, it's a lot easier to do a search for 650b than it is to look for 27.5" or 28" tires or wheels, without having to enter 27.5" mountain bike wheels or 27.5" mountain bike tires (or 28" mountain bike tires or wheels, for that matter) in the Google search bar, or whatever site you're searching through. Designating it 650b is like having a Fastpass at Disneyland when it comes to searching for content on the internet.
    Calling the format 27.5" or 28" inch doesn't make a whole lot of sense, considering different tire widths will yield different diameters.
    Sometimes they're 27.5", sometimes they're 28", sometimes they're somewhere in between, and sometimes perhaps a bit more than 28".

    As far as the comments and complaints about the BSD not being in the middle, exactly between 559 and 622, I think Kirk chose well by going with what it is. Bigger tires will yield bigger diameters, and in my opinion, it's better to err on the slightly smaller side, otherwise you'd be getting just too close to the size of 29ers if 590 BSD is coupled with big tires. 29ers have their place for certain applications. Going with 584 BSD was smart.

    If tire manufacturers want to also include an approximate diameter of the inflated tire on an average width rim, which could be embossed or printed on the tire next to the width of the tire, that could be an option. Using a ~ sign next to the diameter might be useful in case it's not exact and people start complaining. If we go the 27.5" or 28" inch route, people will complain (or have to explain) that it's actually 28", or it's actually 27.5", or whatever may be the case.
    650b is a good name designation for the general wheel/rim size. If people want to call it 27.5" or 28", then that's probably because those people will primarily be using either 27.5" or 28" diameter tires, but not both. The recent tire poll showed that there will be a wide variety of tire widths being used. 650b covers the entire spectrum. The cross country folks shouldn't have to explain to others "they're called 28" wheels, but they're really 27.5" ", and the folks with the bigger/wider tires shouldn't have to explain to others "they're called 27.5" wheels, but they actually measure 28". "

    If people are worried about educating folks who walk into bike shops, it's fairly easy to tell them that the bigger tires will be about 28", and the smaller tires will be about 27.5". And no, I don't think we should average it out by calling them 27.75"ers.

    Plus, 650b has a nice exotic and scientific look to it. Very refined.
  • 05-25-2012
    StiHacka
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Axe View Post
    It is all about style, man. All about style. And ease.

    Steeze, if you may.

    Yep. We need a simple brand that does not require you to remember if .5" is to be typed as .5 or 1/2 and if you need to add inches or " or what. We do not have to be following established standards, heck 650b is about breaking stereotypes, is not it. I want one brand that when searched for, yields all products related to this wheel size available - frames, forks, tires, rims, inner tubes, (, stems :rolleyes:), stickers, MTB magazines. :cool:

    I still like 650b the best. Add a hash mark to represent MTB tracks in mud and to make it hip and we are done! ;)

    #650b FTW! :D