26? What's the point??!! - Page 4- Mtbr.com
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 601 to 739 of 739
  1. #601
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    How many people do you see riding on a road bike in a foul weather? Not many on New Jersey roads

    I can imagine, I'd be scared $hitless to ride New Jersey roads in any weather


    Discs are better in any weather, people used to say the same about v-brakes. Face it, you're a curmudgeon.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  2. #602
    Maxxis cult follower
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,815
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    Sorry if I hurt your feelings, that's not my intent. But I'm entitled to my opinion and my opinion is that 26" wheels are drastically inferior to larger diameter wheels for *someone my size* and *where I ride* and *how I ride.*
    =sParty

    One thing I found as a surprise, really a bit of a shock, is that no one tells you the real diameter of a rim plus tire until you actually measure it yourself.

    26 standard (1.95) is really 25.0 to 25.2 inches

    27.5 standard (2.10) is really 27.0 to 27.2 inches

    29 standard is...I have not measured but I think 29 x 2.3 is actually 29 inches


    However, and this is key, 26" standard tires are not really mountain bike tires, at least not now in 2018. They were 20 years ago, but not now. If you go up at all in width to say, 2.10, or 2.25, or 2.40, the diameter suddenly jumps up an inch to 26.0 - 26.2, because the side casing is longer than on a 1.95, which is basically a relatively wide road bike tire with some extra tread on it.

    So what's the gist of the post? If you ride a 26 x 1.95 on a trail, as Sparticus says it is drastically inferior. Clearance is horrible, bumps are amplified, downhill steering is handicapped. But...there is a solution. 2.5, 2.7, 2.8, 3.0 sizes. 26 x 2.5 and 2.7, maybe 2.8 should be able to fit in your front fork (the back may only be able to take 2.1 to 2.5). You can also buy a 27.5" fork and then put in a 26 x 3.0 tire. The wider 26" tires are not drastically inferior. They may not be as good all-around as 27.5 tires but they are at least in the same range of performance. My 26 x 2.8 can handle chunkier/ruttier stuff significantly better than my 27.5 x 2.5. So if you still have a 26" bike you should really try out wider 2.5, 2.7, or 2.8 tires, you might be surprised what they can do on the trail.
    From Ancient Times - Scarlet Skies Burn to Ash

  3. #603
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by OneTrustMan View Post
    Like something between 80 to 130 dollar.
    I can find only stuff for like 250 up to 500 dollar.
    hub 50$ + Rim 40$ + spoke 40$ = 130$

    Very easy to mount a wheel yourself


    https://www.jensonusa.com/Shimano-SL...oost-Front-Hub
    https://www.jensonusa.com/Sun-Rhyno-ABT-Lite-Rim
    https://www.jensonusa.com/Sapim-Race...s-Steel-Spokes
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  4. #604
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    One thing I found as a surprise, really a bit of a shock, is that no one tells you the real diameter of a rim plus tire until you actually measure it yourself.
    A 26 with 4,8 tire is bigger in diameter than a 700 wheel with a 2.1 tire
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  5. #605
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,704
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    650b was in very limited use at the time it was chosen for mtb use compared to 26 and 29 when they were. It is not even close.

    Early 26” mtbs were repurposed and modified balloon bikes and cruisers. THAT is why 26” was standard. Its not like the early 27.5 mtbs were repurposed randonneur bikes. They were purpose built mtbs, and the builders specifically chose 650b among a range of obscure sizes they could have chosen.

    And no, 650b did not first come from people stuffing 650b tires in their 26”. There were scant few 650b wheels and zero mtb tires to do it with. They did not have them to play with until 650b bikes were already in production.
    You're missing my point that 650b was an off the shelf size not one derived from R&D specifically for MTB.

    There is no dedicated MTB wheel size period. Only repurposed existing sizes from other bikes. 26" roots come from beach cruisers, 29" from road bikes, 650b from comfort bikes, fitness bikes, kids road bikes....

  6. #606
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    I can imagine, I'd be scared $hitless to ride New Jersey roads in any weather


    Discs are better in any weather, people used to say the same about v-brakes. Face it, you're a curmudgeon.
    Yeah...? you can't compare discs on the road bike to discs on a mountain bike - the conditions are vastly different, and discs are far superior to v-brakes in wet, muddy conditions that are much more commonly encountered on the trails. If the discs were so much better on road bikes - racers would have jumped on the opportunity to use them - but they don't and the truth is that the are not much of an improvement over calipers. And for a regular cyclist they are a nightmare to service....
    BTW... no need to call me names - can't come up with a reasonable argument for your position - then just don't write... if you want to use latest tech - go forth and prosper, but this is forum where we're all allowed to state our opinions freely...

  7. #607
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,704
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Discs are better in any weather
    Agreed.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  8. #608
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    Yeah...? you can't compare discs on the road bike to discs on a mountain bike - the conditions are vastly different, and discs are far superior to v-brakes in wet, muddy conditions that are much more commonly encountered on the trails. If the discs were so much better on road bikes - racers would have jumped on the opportunity to use them - but they don't and the truth is that the are not much of an improvement over calipers. And for a regular cyclist they are a nightmare to service....
    BTW... no need to call me names - can't come up with a reasonable argument for your position - then just don't write... if you want to use latest tech - go forth and prosper, but this is forum where we're all allowed to state our opinions freely...
    You of course are entitled to your opinion and no name calling here. I must state that your comment on disc brakes being a nightmare for the regular rider is not really accurate. I bought the world’s worst hydraulic disc brakes in 1998 made by Hayes on a Trek 8900 that I just gave away after 20 years. As bad as they were in term of acting like a light switch, I rode that bike 20,000 miles and could not count one day where using the brakes or servicing them could be any where close to being a nightmare. I do recall one day where a few of us rode down Aliaska Ski Resort mountain in Alaska very well. Grass was waist deep and wet with moose standing in the thickest parts with only their Racks visible. My Friends with rim brakes were basically out of control the whole way down. My discs allowed me a very safe and controlled descent. Lastly, road racing hydraulic discs are still new to the racing scene where tradition often trumps improvement in equipment for sometime after introduction. Some riders were complaining about the safety of the discs with the possibility of a slicing injury. So ride what you like but the best hydraulic discs are way superior to rim brakes. When I was living in Germany, I rode the Alps with a 18 mile downhill and I was scared all the down on my rim brakes. Actually I was terrified way back in 1973. That was a road bike I bought in Paris. Rim brakes may weight a bit less but disc are way safer in some situations if not all. I hate slowing down but when you must, I want the best stopping power available, Road or Mountain applications. Safe Travels all!

  9. #609
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Quote Originally Posted by blaklabl View Post
    I actually have this specific post bookmarked, as it may be my favorite on MTBR of all time.
    I ride in many places all the time and just never see riders acting that way. I ride expensive equipment and most folks I meet do not even know what they are looking at. Riding just seems like folks I do not know much if at all enjoying the sport. Most could care less what you ride. If you are having fun and being safe, the make or model of your bikes means nothing. I rode my 26 for 20 years and in the last several years rode it mostly to MSU football games while leaving the big dollar bikes safe at home. Often folks would yell as I rode by, nice Trek. Ride what you like and for the few that bitch, you know what to tell the losers.

  10. #610
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    If the discs were so much better on road bikes - racers would have jumped on the opportunity to use them - but they don't and the truth is that the are not much of an improvement over calipers. And for a regular cyclist they are a nightmare to service....


    Most world tour pros are using them now and within a few years disc brakes will be ubiquitous on road bikes. Most riers who use them seem to think they're better.

    Also disagree that they're a nightmare to service, different yes but not rocket science.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  11. #611
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    BTW... no need to call me names - can't come up with a reasonable argument for your position - then just don't write...



    Sorry I didn't mean to offend, only joking around. I'll tread more lightly in the future.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  12. #612
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,870
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Sorry I didn't mean to offend, only joking around. I'll tread more lightly in the future.
    RoadBikeReview.com and BikeForums.com have entire subforums dedicated to arguing about disc brakes on road bikes.

    It's a raw subject for a lot of folks.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  13. #613
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,234
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    RoadBikeReview.com and BikeForums.com have entire subforums dedicated to arguing about disc brakes on road bikes.

    It's a raw subject for a lot of folks.


    Weird. I don't see any argument, just something that's happening. Most see it as an improvement but some don't. Same as it ever was.

    There will be options for calipers for decades.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  14. #614
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,870
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Weird. I don't see any argument, just something that's happening. Most see it as an improvement but some don't. Same as it ever was.

    There will be options for calipers for decades.
    Go look around some road biking sites and you will see epic ones
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  15. #615
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,234
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Go look around some road biking sites and you will see epic ones


    I believe that they're arguing but I just can't figure out why. Sort of like most of this thread.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  16. #616
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedalon2018 View Post
    I must state that your comment on disc brakes being a nightmare for the regular rider is not really accurate. I bought the world’s worst hydraulic disc brakes in 1998 made by Hayes on a Trek 8900 that I just gave away after 20 years. As bad as they were in term of acting like a light switch, I rode that bike 20,000 miles and could not count one day where using the brakes or servicing them could be any where close to being a nightmare.
    The early Hayes cable actuated hydraulic brakes were weird (not sure if these are the ones you had but 1998 brings those to my mind)... I'm a happy user of Hope Mono Minis, and Hope Tech disc brakes, and before that I used Magura Marta's that leaked, and the totally worry free Avid BB7s, so this is not an argument about discs not being great for stopping. I've had much of issues with my Marta SL's and that is what I'm basing my comments on - I've had bent rotors, contaminated pads, master cylinder leaking, air in the line, inconsistent feel - left to right... granted most of these were due to a leaky cylinder. I've spent many hours trying bleed the system before I figured out that the master cylinder was leaking. On the other hand my Hopes have been worry free... So I get that you can travel down crazy downhills and need the discs - or not... but if I live in flat lands - do I need discs? Not really. But pretty soon that's all that will be on sale - whether we need it or not... and at that extra cost that we are willing to pay for it.

  17. #617
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    599
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    And for a regular cyclist they are a nightmare to service....
    I don't get this. As a newer cyclist, I have found disc way easier to service then V-brakes. Bleeding brakes is so easy versus the seeming constant need to adjust V-brakes.

  18. #618
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,505
    Funny how everyone compares 20 year old 26 with modern/recent 650 or 700 bikes.

    I have a custom made Ti bike made to my specs ,26er ,modern geometry.
    Perfect. (see answer 571)
    Haven't try a 650/700 bike that comes close with handling and accelerating , climbing.

    BTW , I'm 6'2''
    Last edited by fokof; 11-19-2018 at 06:53 PM.
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  19. #619
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Hman0217 View Post
    Mass production and standardization of parts - the same thing we (myself included) lament - allow us AMAZING choices as consumers.
    Maybe but the problem is that the industry changes the standards every couple of years so as a consumer , I don't have the choice of buying new stuff.

    One example : I got a bike as a commuter 5 years ago , cool bike. The frame broke but it was lifetime warrantied, so now the new bikes are 700 wheeled , boost , thru axle , they couldn't just swap the parts on a new frame , so the company offered me instead a brand new complete bike.
    Very cool (in theory) but now I have a bike that I'm unable to put any of my tires , my wheels , my cassettes (11 sp) ..... And I have lots and lots of parts/tires.....
    All new standard that forces me to buy new stuff all over again.
    (I won't , I'll probably sell it)


    Luckily , the 26er standard have been there for so long that there's still a lots of parts available. No such luck with newest frames though....... got to go custom.
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  20. #620
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DaveRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    164
    Because the 26" is paid for. I am faster on a 29er though.

  21. #621
    mtbr member
    Reputation: gravityryder26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    29
    This thread reminds me of this song....

    I'm Faster Than You...IFHT Films

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyTyjQbvylg

  22. #622
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    3
    Depends on terrain and budget.

    Try to buy a nice used FS bike in newer wheel sizes for reasonable $$ ...

    I just got a K2 alum frame, carbon swing arm with air on both ends, Deore, Mavic, even a Ti seat post for $100 and a few days work to straighten out. I bought it to convert to a eMTB, but it was/is so nice, I just couldn't do it ... It's my new favorite trail cruiser

    I bough a Hardrock Sport (used) to convert. Added a Manitou R7 fork in place of that god awful RST fork and it's a sweet ride too. It'll be even better with a Thudbuster and a mid drive kit

    All in for both bikes (not including the conversion kit) I'm in for less than 1 large.

    If I spent that same budget on one MTB, I'd not reach my goals (MTB and eMTB) and I'd be one one bike for a long time, for everything ...

    Used 26'ers give me options and diversity and fun

  23. #623
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by BrocLuno View Post
    Try to buy a nice used FS bike in newer wheel sizes for reasonable $$ ...

    I just got a K2 alum frame, carbon swing arm with air on both ends, Deore, Mavic, even a Ti seat post for $100 and a few days work to straighten out. I bought it to convert to a eMTB, but it was/is so nice, I just couldn't do it ... It's my new favorite trail cruiser :
    Just my opinion, but personally i'd rather have lower end but newer components than old but higher end stuff.
    Yeah, Mavic and Deore sounds cool, but how old and how beat up are those components? That technology might have trickled down to the most basic stuff by now.
    Air on both ends is cool too, but how good do they work after all these years? Can you still service them and get parts for them? How much more abuse will that old carbon swing arm take?
    What about oldschool geometry? What about all the old standards and compatibility? If you want to buy something for the bike, do you have to hunt down old used parts?

    Old and cheap stuff has it's charm for sure, but I wouldn't say it's always an alternative to modern stuff. Again just my opinion of course and I probably sound a bit ranty. I worked in a shop where we mainly dealt with old and vintages bikes and i've had a horrible boss that thought every modern component sucked and for him a hydraulic brake was the devil itself. I've heard him say such bulls**t to clueless customers so many times.

  24. #624
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPunchCholla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by HollyBoni View Post
    Just my opinion, but personally i'd rather have lower end but newer components than old but higher end stuff.
    Yeah, Mavic and Deore sounds cool, but how old and how beat up are those components? That technology might have trickled down to the most basic stuff by now.
    Air on both ends is cool too, but how good do they work after all these years? Can you still service them and get parts for them? How much more abuse will that old carbon swing arm take?
    What about oldschool geometry? What about all the old standards and compatibility? If you want to buy something for the bike, do you have to hunt down old used parts?

    Old and cheap stuff has it's charm for sure, but I wouldn't say it's always an alternative to modern stuff. Again just my opinion of course and I probably sound a bit ranty. I worked in a shop where we mainly dealt with old and vintages bikes and i've had a horrible boss that thought every modern component sucked and for him a hydraulic brake was the devil itself. I've heard him say such bulls**t to clueless customers so many times.
    It really depends on the components and bike. I bought a used 2012 Jedi with a 2011 boxxer with a charger damper, code brakes, ccdb air shock (2016), Stan's wheels, saint drive train, for about 1/3 what the equivalent setup would have cost. Just because it was 26. For DH bikes, if you not racing, the geometry had only changed incrementally. If I was buying today and buying new and money wasn't an issue, I would go 29 but just because that is where the industry is headed, not because I think it will make much difference in my riding.

    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    It's just a flesh wound!

  25. #625
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    3
    Agreed 100% If you are cruising and just exploring around; 26 will do most, if not all. It has for decades. If you want to race, or even just to maintain race pace, yeah, you'll have to go bigger or split sizes.

    26 semi fat on rear and bigger up front might work out best ... Been that way on MX and Enduro (18~21) motorcycles for a long time

  26. #626
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    650
    I didn't mention the wheelsize on purpose, my comment was about all the other components. Probably off topic. Sorry!

  27. #627
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    3

    Listen! 26 is good basis for conversion

    I get that. But, in my case all the parts were in decent/OK shape. Was owned by a Marin County resident who spent serious bank going weight weenie and then sold it on to one of his buds who let the air run down on the Marzocchi forks and decided it was broke ... So he sold it for $100

    I got it home and realized they had reversed the lower shock mounting plate so the rear was all jacked up. A new used Fox shock w/o piggy back boost chamber (the part that created the mounting dilemma) and a reset on the plate with new SS screws and JB Weld under (onto clean slightly abraded carbon/epoxy), and it was sorted.

    I emailed the PO owner requesting owners manuals or service guides, and the adapter for the air fork? He wrote back that he did not have any lit, AND did not even know you could pump up the forks ... Needless to say, there was not that much total time on the bike

    I'll buy rich posers cast-offs any day. I don't feel bad about it. And yes, you can get seal kits for the fork from Dr Marzocchi in the EU. Fox will recondition any shock sent in so what's to loose ... Carbon stress? Well it has to be ridden for that to be a thing ... Clueless owners are a good thing - for me

    Used parts all over eBay. Just gotta know what you are looking for, and try alternate listings and spellings

    Once you rescue an older MTB, it can be pressed into general trail riding service, passed on down the line to the next generation, get blinged out as a white-walled cruiser, or converted to an eBike.

    26" MTB's are the best choice for all these things as they are tough, have interchangeable parts, can be re-geared easy enough, usually have wide enough rear triangles to accept + tires, etc. Fork swaps are not that tough. Getting a whole package under 30 lbs is doable. Under 25 lbs is spendy, but also doable.

    How cush is it to ride along with your buds down the RxR right-of-way with no jarring while they are cussing big sharp rocks and rough ground ... I don't need a 29'er to do that - just decent suspension

    That K2 is now my favorite cruiser and play trail rider. The Hardrock Sport is becoming a MTB eBike. My old Trek is still going off road, just not as often now that the K2 is here

    Will I get a full carbon 29'er with suspension on both ends, maybe ... I have trails that could demand it (Mt Tamalpias & Mt St Helena). But I'm not convinced that it is needed. If the speed and the jumps are dialed back a bit, it's not a problem until you get to dbl Black Diamond stuff ...

  28. #628
    occupation : Foole
    Reputation: Fuelish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,548
    I'm a shorter guy, so 26 "fits" me better, not to mention the bikes are paid for, adjusted/tuned to my liking, and I feel like I'm not missing out on anything. Not to mention I prefer to run my guitars through tube amps, and I drive a 6 speed manual car......guess I'm a Luddite, or something

  29. #629
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: str8edgMTBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,899
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuelish View Post
    I'm a shorter guy, so 26 "fits" me better, not to mention the bikes are paid for, adjusted/tuned to my liking, and I feel like I'm not missing out on anything. Not to mention I prefer to run my guitars through tube amps, and I drive a 6 speed manual car......guess I'm a Luddite, or something
    hmmm...tube amps!! Love it! I record (bass) with tube amps, but use SS live...sort of like my old 26er is now my commuter/ rec trail bike, and my 29+ gets all beat up. Nothing like having multiple tools!!!
    Go practice. Figure it out. - Fleas

    15 Surly Krampus - King Amongst Bikes
    LET IT SNOW!

  30. #630
    mtbr member
    Reputation: supersedona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by BrocLuno View Post
    Agreed 100% If you are cruising and just exploring around; 26 will do most, if not all. It has for decades. If you want to race, or even just to maintain race pace, yeah, you'll have to go bigger or split sizes.

    26 semi fat on rear and bigger up front might work out best ... Been that way on MX and Enduro (18~21) motorcycles for a long time
    Actually I took a couple years off for finances and did a couple trail races this year with the ol 26" steed. This year on 2.23" tires and still got 3rd and 2nd in two of them. Lots of remarks about being old school, but in a tight technical maneuvering trail race I like the second nature of a well practiced setup.
    '93 Giant Sedona ATX custom
    '93 Giant Sedona AtX aero-edition
    '73 Schwinn Suburban
    '95 Fuji Suncrest

  31. #631
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Quote Originally Posted by sXeXBMXer View Post
    hmmm...tube amps!! Love it! I record (bass) with tube amps, but use SS live...sort of like my old 26er is now my commuter/ rec trail bike, and my 29+ gets all beat up. Nothing like having multiple tools!!!
    Well I use both a tube pre amp and two mono block tube amp, drive two different cars with manuals and ride 29ers. They just roll over stuff better. I still rode my 1998 Trek 8900 til earlier this year I gave her away. Just saying...Yeti Yeti Yada Yada Yada

  32. #632
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,505
    Still love my 26
    Last edited by fokof; 12-09-2018 at 08:27 PM.
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  33. #633
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,687
    Cross-post-warning

    I fell in love with my 2005 Komodo when I built it ground-up in 2006. It's began life as a freeride hardtail:
    Attachment 1228257

    Moved to an even more freeride hardtail:

    Attachment 1228258

    Then put on a 5lbs diet as a trail bike:

    Attachment 1228261

    Then to an all mountain shredder:

    Attachment 1228262

    To a rigid all mountain hardtail:

    Attachment 1228264

    Finally back to a 5" All Mountain hardtail:

    Attachment 1228265

    There wasn't any configuration that this bike couldn't do well.

    It's been pretty greasy with the freeze and thaw weather. It was finally cold enough to freeze the ground hard. Finally, I could get off the gravel and hit some singletrack again!

    I fired up the truck and headed out watching my house disappear through the back glass of my truck...eyeballing my 12 year old Komodo behind me as the exhaust billowed out...stark white into the crisp 20 degree air instantly seeming to freeze completely still, hovering over the road.

    The trail head is only 3 miles from my front door...I was there in minutes and on the bike only seconds later.

    10 minutes into my ride, tragedy strikes. My saddle falls like a tree in the forest...and I knew it was over.

    Attachment 1228269


    I rode back to the truck standing the entire way...knowing how much trouble I'm in...my nearly new 135mm rear Hope hub clacking at me reminding me of the planned obsolescence of 135mm dropouts on my 12 year old frame.

    My barely broken-in 150mm fork damper swishing as the suspension compresses and rebounds as if it was whispering to me..."my steerer is just 1 1/8" straight."

    My 26" tires crunching on the frozen ground crying out to me as if to say..."hey... it's been a good long run & 26 ain't dead yet...but good luck finding a suitable replacement!"

    Well my friends...the only thing that could have made this size large Kinesis-built freerided hardtail frame any better would have been offering it in a size XL for people my height, with a seat tube/top tube gusset on top instead of on bottom, and a slightly bigger reach, stack, & head tube.

    The very next day, I scored a brand new in box XL Mullet frame that meets all of those desires!!

    It's on the way and my old friend has already gone through organ donor surgery.


    Attachment 1228270


    26 ain't dead!!!

  34. #634
    Downcountry AF
    Reputation: blaklabl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,467

    I just love my 26" wheels.

    Listen, I have had them all. 26 (more than I care to count), 27.5 (1), 29 (probably 5). At 5'8" and a 30" inseam, I am not especially tall - really not tall at all. I have also spent more than I care to think about on bicycles over the years than I care to think about, always chasing the next best thing and whatever riding discipline was en vogue.

    As it turns out, I REALLY like single speeding, and I like the way 26" wheels handle FOR ME. I am more financially secure than I have ever been in my life at this point, and can really afford t get myself whatever I'd like if the mood struck, but so far it hasn't. Every time I throw my leg over my bike and go for a ride, I catch myself wondering "well what if I got this thing" or "I wonder if that would make this better"...and then I run up on a rock-strewn, uphill pitch covered in baby heads that I am able to just pick my way up through and keep momentum as I crest it, and that usually silences the chatter. I can't even begin to imagine trying to do that stuff on a 29 or 29+, what with my short legs trying to turn over cranks and all...

    Sure, my rigid titanium SS 26"er is a beautiful pile of compromises and standards for the not too distant past, but I love it and it does whatever I ask it to without hesitation.

    One day, when I do have to get a new frame I will move to 27.5 for the parts availability, disc brakes, etc...but for now I'm pretty content with what I am rolling.

    26? What's the point??!!-img_3320.jpg

    26? What's the point??!!-img_3354.jpg
    MTBR: Your dad's online mountain bike forum.



  35. #635
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,003
    Those chrome bars...nice...

    Had a set of old Profiles super similar; I miss those things.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  36. #636
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    24
    Rims were usually wider back in the 80s when 26s were the size to have - maybe part of the problems people have had with 26s in modern times has something to do with the ever narrowing of rims down to a typical 17/19mm.

  37. #637
    High Plains Luddite
    Reputation: Squeeze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    133
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuelish View Post
    I drive a 6 speed manual car......guess I'm a Luddite, or something
    If you were a true Luddite, you'd drive a three on the tree!


  38. #638
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    650
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeyMK View Post
    Rims were usually wider back in the 80s when 26s were the size to have - maybe part of the problems people have had with 26s in modern times has something to do with the ever narrowing of rims down to a typical 17/19mm.
    Rims were wider (and steel) back in the 50s-60s too when a 28 x 1 1/2er was the size to have.

  39. #639
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by blaklabl View Post
    Sure, my rigid titanium SS 26"er is a beautiful pile of compromises and standards for the not too distant past, but I love it and it does whatever I ask it to without hesitation.
    I also have a 26er rigid that for a few years was my main ride, and still I'm on it a lot. My SS is a 650b though, for no particular reason than that's how the parts fell together. Your Titanium bike, wow, it looks really nice. I like the little touches of red that you have going on. Or is that purple, that I see centered around the crank-arm bolt? Your bike looks nice, that's for sure.

  40. #640
    Downcountry AF
    Reputation: blaklabl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,467
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Those chrome bars...nice...

    Had a set of old Profiles super similar; I miss those things.
    They are titanium, made by Defiance Frameworks in Homer, Alaska
    MTBR: Your dad's online mountain bike forum.



  41. #641
    Downcountry AF
    Reputation: blaklabl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,467
    Quote Originally Posted by JonathanGennick View Post
    I also have a 26er rigid that for a few years was my main ride, and still I'm on it a lot. My SS is a 650b though, for no particular reason than that's how the parts fell together. Your Titanium bike, wow, it looks really nice. I like the little touches of red that you have going on. Or is that purple, that I see centered around the crank-arm bolt? Your bike looks nice, that's for sure.
    Purple on the crank. It has a bunch of ano colors, purple, orange, lime green...pretty much anything goes with ti
    MTBR: Your dad's online mountain bike forum.



  42. #642
    occupation : Foole
    Reputation: Fuelish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Squeeze View Post
    If you were a true Luddite, you'd drive a three on the tree!

    True, but....fwiw, I have driven a couple....and I guess I would be riding a SS and playing acoustic guits (I do have a couple)….was just a swipe at Gibson's Henry J's quote about folks wanting "traditional" Gibsons as Luddites....I don't need no steenking robot tuners....LOL

  43. #643
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeyMK View Post
    Rims were usually wider back in the 80s when 26s were the size to have - maybe part of the problems people have had with 26s in modern times has something to do with the ever narrowing of rims down to a typical 17/19mm.
    hmm maybe in the mid 80s we had something close to 30mm wide rims IIRC (eg on my 85 Rocky Sherpa). and again late 90s the 27mm Sun Rhyno rims were std issue for north shore riding when I lived in Vancouver. By the early 90s the rims got narrower with the obsession with XC racing of the day, they were narrow as you say like road racing rims ish. Today all I see mainly is 32-45mm rims around here. My narrowest is 38mm, my widest is 45mm

  44. #644
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,687
    Well, I did try to get the frame warrantied by Jamis...they said they actually still had a few of those 2005 Komodo FX frames in a size large in stock in grey...but the warranty on a Komodo and Kromo were only 5-years b/c of the rowdy nature of the bike.

    They did say that if I could find my 12-year-old receipt that they could give me a discount on a new frame.

    Either way...I should have been running an inch-or-so longer seatpost. Then it'd still be alive.

    They also said that the lifetime warranty on their other hardtails are only good for the lifetime of the frame material.

    "Lifetime warranty refers to the materials lifetime. Each material has a fatigue life, the failures you are seeing are the result of fatigue, not from any manufacturing defect. If you need more clarification on this, check out the support section of our website..." etc...

    So really...a lifetime warranty never means the lifetime of the components - duh
    May or may not mean the life time of the original owner...
    Could possibly not cover frame material failure...um...wha?

    I get it that they definitely cover defects in construction...but not covering failure of a material they choose to use in the construction of the product seems like a CYA loophole to me. If you don't trust the material to last a lifetime...don't give it a lifetime warranty.



    We offer a lifetime warranty!! (Unless you break it.)

    No big deal. I'm set either way. I really should consider trying to dig up my 12y.o. receipt and getting a good deal on a Dragonslayer 26+.

  45. #645
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,003
    Quote Originally Posted by blaklabl View Post
    They are titanium, made by Defiance Frameworks in Homer, Alaska
    Thanks; I like.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  46. #646
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bluegill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    No big deal. I'm set either way. I really should consider trying to dig up my 12y.o. receipt and getting a good deal on a Dragonslayer 26+.
    If that's the way they want to play it (*****ing out on a lifetime warranty) then just make up your own receipt from a now-defunct bike shop.

  47. #647
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,021
    Thats the way all manufactures run a lifetime warranty...people read "Lifetime" and think it's their life, when in fact it what the manufacture thinks is a good lifespan for the frame and it's intended use... usually about 5 years.
    SOmetime a great company will honour a warranty outside their specified timeframe, others will be sucktastic on "lifetime".
    All the gear and no idea.

  48. #648
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bridgestone14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,058
    I have created receipts for small things in the past. If all they want is a receipt pretty sure you or someone you know can make that happen.
    Looking for a Medium Scott Scale frame, preferably a 2012 in 26.

  49. #649
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,687
    Nah. I'm not gonna lie about it. I bought it from Jenson in 2006. I've got a replacement that will fit me even better coming in 2 days.

    I'm good.

  50. #650
    Special Ed
    Reputation: Neuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    103
    Found this interesting. DH'r Neko Mulally, who likes to fiddle around with different designs, tried out 27.5 vs 29 several times on a test course and had this to say at the end;

    One thing that was reiterated as we debated the potential benefits of one wheel size versus the other was that it was really difficult to tell the difference between the two. Neko said, "I changed rear wheels almost every run and at times would forget which wheel I had on while I was riding. I would rail a turn and think, man this 27.5 wheel turns fast and then realize I had the 29er on." Using the stopwatch confirmed that it doesn't make much of a difference in the conditions he was testing in.
    'Things you own...begin owning you.'

  51. #651
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6
    I still have my 26er" dirt jump specific bike. My 4 other bikes are 27.5. I had converted my Mosso Scandium hardtail from 26 to 27.5 and I will never ever change it back. It's like night and day. Enjoy it significantly more now. So much so I converted my 2005 Santa Cruz Heckler to 27.5 and it is not going back to 26 as long as I own it. I sold all the 26" wheels. I know there's a lot of die hards but I feel the difference and I ride longer and more enjoyably than before. That's just my 2 cents and I've been riding a very long time. I won't go to 29 though. I've tried it but not for me.

  52. #652
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,952
    Quote Originally Posted by gabe999 View Post
    I won't go to 29 though. I've tried it but not for me.
    What didn't you like about it?

  53. #653
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    I switched from a 1998 Trek 8900 to a Ti Hardtail last spring. That was a 26 to a 29 jump. Weird after riding 20 years in a 26-2.1. However in the course of my first two long rides, not only did the clown wheel feel go away, I discovered the biggie wheels go over roots and the like much better. Really surprised me. I have come to really enjoy the 29ers. Only draw back is the extra weight in both the wheels and rims. They are almost like sitting on top of the cycling world.

  54. #654
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedalon2018 View Post
    I switched from a 1998 Trek 8900 to a Ti Hardtail last spring. That was a 26 to a 29 jump. Weird after riding 20 years in a 26-2.1. However in the course of my first two long rides, not only did the clown wheel feel go away, I discovered the biggie wheels go over roots and the like much better. Really surprised me. I have come to really enjoy the 29ers. Only draw back is the extra weight in both the wheels and rims. They are almost like sitting on top of the cycling world.
    Try a 29+
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  55. #655
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    6
    I've tried, recently as well, all the high end, big name brands 29ers from Santa Cruz, Trek, Giant, Rocky Mountain, Specialized, etc.. I'm 5'7". I wouldn't say dislike them. The best of the lot was from Rocky Mountain which felt most like a 27.5". If I had to replace my hardtail 27.5 it would be with a RM 29er....if I could afford it. That said, I ride mostly trail/Enduro and like to jump and something about the take off and the landing on a 29er just was not inspiring, somewhat scary (maybe the feeling being up high and thought of keeping the large wheels straight) and the extra effort for me to make that launch feel impactful. I hope that makes sense. During xmas I vacationed in Phoenix and Sedona. Did the National Trail on a rented 29er. It was great since I didn't know what I was up against. I'd do it again on 27.5 for that more connected, bottoming out of my suspension feel...like I own that bike, man.

  56. #656
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Quote Originally Posted by skankingbiker View Post
    Try a 29+
    I will do that. Waiting for my LBS to get me the new eTap AXS 46/33 w/10-28, and then change up the rubber. Thanks for the tip. I have a Fatty but never tried 29+.

  57. #657
    TOP TIER LURKER
    Reputation: Hawgzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    25,090
    The last 26er I ever owned tried to kill me and because of that, it was the last 26er I ever owned.
    life is... "All About Bikes"...

  58. #658
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedalon2018 View Post
    I will do that. Waiting for my LBS to get me the new eTap AXS 46/33 w/10-28, and then change up the rubber. Thanks for the tip. I have a Fatty but never tried 29+.
    I have a pugsley converted to 29+ ...a "Krampug." It rolls over everything. Feels like riding a monster truck. Its fun, but a big difference from carving with a 26 HT
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  59. #659
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    I remember when I first really trail rode my 26" fatbike it was super amazing to ride anywhere at all and get away with all kinds of shenanigans that would be painful on a skinnier 2.0- 2.4 tire.

    That fatbike is not what I think of as a 26er.

    Plus tires are a bit like that too.

    It all depends on skill and where you ride, as well as the bike, of course.

    I think that current variety of tire widths are wonderful thing. Something for everyone.

    Narrower tires have to be placed better on the trail, and with more precision, with less suspension and smaller diameter.

    Old school 26" rigid bikes are more difficult to ride. But they can ride.

    Kind of like old school skiis.

    Once you learn them, you can turn them.

    Nothing wrong with the latest stuff. It's better.

    But like vintage for vintage sake, that's okay. Just get out of the way old man!

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  60. #660
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    Old school 26" rigid bikes are more difficult to ride. But they can ride.

    Kind of like old school skiis.

    Once you learn them, you can turn them
    Funny. On ride with buds last fall on my oldie but goodie 26er. They say: "Wow, you are really carving on that thing; how are you able to keep up without a dropper or rear suspension"
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  61. #661
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    I remember when I first really trail rode my 26" fatbike it was super amazing to ride anywhere at all and get away with all kinds of shenanigans that would be painful on a skinnier 2.0- 2.4 tire.

    That fatbike is not what I think of as a 26er.

    Plus tires are a bit like that too.

    It all depends on skill and where you ride, as well as the bike, of course.

    I think that current variety of tire widths are wonderful thing. Something for everyone.

    Narrower tires have to be placed better on the trail, and with more precision, with less suspension and smaller diameter.

    Old school 26" rigid bikes are more difficult to ride. But they can ride.

    Kind of like old school skiis.

    Once you learn them, you can turn them.

    Nothing wrong with the latest stuff. It's better.

    But like vintage for vintage sake, that's okay. Just get out of the way old man!

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    Some of the new stuff is better yes, but I must say the pressfit BB on my 650b "super enduro" bike sucks. The interntal cable routing sucks too. I also don't like the 148 rear spacing which has caused more damage to hangers and mechs than I've ever dealt with. I also find 27" wheels to be little more than a weight penalty. Geo improvemnts on the other hand are great but I was south of 66 10 years ago. IMO, head angles are the biggest improvement in bikes over the past 10 to 15 years. Seat tubes too but that's not as important to me. TT lenghths and BB height I find annyoing. I just size down now, or run stupid short stems that make the sterring twitchy.

  62. #662
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    "but I was south of 66 10 years ago."

    Head angle, or years old?

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  63. #663
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Some of the new stuff is better yes, but I must say the pressfit BB on my 650b "super enduro" bike sucks. The interntal cable routing sucks too. I also don't like the 148 rear spacing which has caused more damage to hangers and mechs than I've ever dealt with. I also find 27" wheels to be little more than a weight penalty. Geo improvemnts on the other hand are great but I was south of 66 10 years ago. IMO, head angles are the biggest improvement in bikes over the past 10 to 15 years. Seat tubes too but that's not as important to me. TT lenghths and BB height I find annyoing. I just size down now, or run stupid short stems that make the sterring twitchy.
    Press fit bb are one of the worst ideas in bike design. One chap had a high dollar Trek and the press fit was making a ton of noise. Trek did nothing to fix so he went Ti with a threaded bb, the only way to go.

  64. #664
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    "but I was south of 66 10 years ago."

    Head angle, or years old?

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    I also was running ~66 HTA 10 years ago; I've found I prefer something a little steeper for trail riding.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  65. #665
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedalon2018 View Post
    Press fit bb are one of the worst ideas in bike design. One chap had a high dollar Trek and the press fit was making a ton of noise. Trek did nothing to fix so he went Ti with a threaded bb, the only way to go.
    Why I won't buy a Stache
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  66. #666
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    "but I was south of 66 10 years ago."

    Head angle, or years old?

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    Sometimes I do feel that old. I miss the old days honestly, and not because of wheel size. I miss what proper gnarly trails used to be like before the younger generation sanatized everything. I miss being able to ride social trails without strava getting them shut down. Most of you dumb kids don't even know everything is going to their heat map even when you're not tracking rides. Strava is responsilbe for so many trail colsures just so you kids can see who's best at straitlining corners. You kids started with better bikes than us old crusties, but we had local's trails that you kids would pee your little panties over.

  67. #667
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I needed a good laugh. Yea, we also wrecked a lot more back in the day and we rode with almost no protection. I have scars to prove it. Safe Travels All!

  68. #668
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    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

  69. #669
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    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!

  70. #670
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: str8edgMTBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,899
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    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
    amen...and some of us were doing this all on BMX bikes as well...smaller tires, way different geo, harder to climb tech on for sure, but you rode what you had

    you just sort of got on and rode to where ever the trail took you

    my arms, legs back and ass are still my suspension today...though my post heart attack "fragile" heart won't allow me to ride as hard as I did back then

    I also have no problem with flow trails, but I don't like flow trails that were originally techy trails, and then became sanitized...part of the fun of the challenge for me is/was to ride in places where people said that my bike "shouldn't be ale to go"
    Go practice. Figure it out. - Fleas

    15 Surly Krampus - King Amongst Bikes
    LET IT SNOW!

  71. #671
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    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...
    Nice post. That brings me back to those old days. Besides courting death on occasion on an ancient Univega I also took my road bike a Peugeot Ventoux thru the glens in the area. I'd drop a few psi on the Michelins and rip thru the flatter sections. Those early days were fun and crazy at teh same time. We rode on them junkers!

  72. #672
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,704

    Yup, good post, Jack

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    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.
    “You go to war with the army you have.”

    We rode the bikes we had. We had a blast. Part of the fun and adventure was the discovery of it all. Beyond just riding the bike. Exploring the backcountry was thrilling. True adventure.

    I became a Medicare recipient a few months ago and I recall the camaraderie of the early days. The ‘80s. I started riding mountain bikes when I was 32. Even though there were few of us back then, mountain biking was a social activity inasmuch as one rider would practically cheer when he met another rider on a trail. We’d meet & greet. We were oddities, rarities. We sought one another out. We felt like the pioneers that we were.

    Back to the point of this thread, as time goes on, armies do get better. So do bikes. Antique 26ers make great mantle pieces. As for hoots & hollers, give me one of today’s wonder machines including sophisticated suspension and a party post. Even at this advanced age, I still rip.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

    We don't quit riding because we get old.
    We get old because we quit riding.

  73. #673
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    We rode the bikes we had. We had a blast. Part of the fun and adventure was the discovery of it all. Beyond just riding the bike. Exploring the backcountry was thrilling. True adventure.

    I became a Medicare recipient a few months ago and I recall the camaraderie of the early days. The ‘80s. I started riding mountain bikes when I was 32. Even though there were few of us back then, mountain biking was a social activity inasmuch as one rider would practically cheer when he met another rider on a trail. We’d meet & greet. We were oddities, rarities. We sought one another out. We felt like the pioneers that we were.
    =sParty
    Nice. I remember being able to tell who had been out on the trails recently by looking at tire tracks.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  74. #674
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,687
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Nice. I remember being able to tell who had been out on the trails recently by looking at tire tracks.

    Yes! I'm with ya!!

  75. #675
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    5

    Here's a fun thinG!

    26? What's the point??!!-screen-shot-2019-02-10-11.47.10-am.jpg

  76. #676
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Yesterday I took out a 26" bike from the garage because I was craving a ride on it.

    Man it was awesome.

    After months of riding 29ers, this was a breath of fresh air.

    And the rim brakes! Cane Creek Direct Curve. One of the last great buys I made at Nashbar.

    On the trails. No problems. Just 26.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  77. #677
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by golden boy View Post
    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.
    So you aggree with me that 27½ and 29 is nothing but marketing bullshit?
    26" untill I stop riding.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  78. #678
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,433
    I rode the '07 RMB this morning, just pointed it where I was goin'.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  79. #679
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Oh My Sack! View Post
    Because 650b and 29 are easier...just like an eBike. I don't need easy. I'm only 55.

    And then there's this...

    The first pic is when I built my new carbon 26 hoops and mounted the standard 2.35 tires that I can buy all day long for only $35 ea. and always buy them in bulk.

    The second pic is the bike today with the elimination of the Fox 34 CTD and CTD Boostvalve shock, adding a brand new Pike RCT3 and new Monarch Plus Debonaire shock. And I should mention I built this brand new 2014 factory warranty covered Expert Evo frameset in June '15 and paid <1/3 of it's new price and built it with all top line components for pennies on the dollar. It would cost me well over $7k to spec this bike as it sits with the only difference being wheel diameter.

    I'll be wearing this one out.
    You are still young. Hope you'll have many more years with your nice bikes
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  80. #680
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by fokof View Post
    It's a good analogy with bikes:
    The 26ers are come back in fashion in 10 years , people are gonna realize how fast and responsive they are compared to old 29ers.
    I had to order a custom made frame to keep a 26 setup ...... sad......


    PS : I know that we're in a bike forum but about the vinyl comeback :
    it is 75% nostalgia and 25% to be cool.
    Nothing about sound , in fact , the difference perceived in sound quality is mostly due to the higher distortion with vinyl. (if you compare to uncompressed digital sound)
    Distortion is giving "a certain sound" that digital doesn't have.
    Same thing with tube amps , certain people prefer them because of the higher distortion.
    You can still buy a new Ibis Mojo frame on their web site should you want to.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  81. #681
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Maybe the trails he cares about aren't the type of trails that they run pro XC races on?

    I suppose most users of this web site are not really XC pro racers so who cares?
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  82. #682
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    One thing I found as a surprise, really a bit of a shock, is that no one tells you the real diameter of a rim plus tire until you actually measure it yourself.

    26 standard (1.95) is really 25.0 to 25.2 inches

    27.5 standard (2.10) is really 27.0 to 27.2 inches

    29 standard is...I have not measured but I think 29 x 2.3 is actually 29 inches


    However, and this is key, 26" standard tires are not really mountain bike tires, at least not now in 2018. They were 20 years ago, but not now. If you go up at all in width to say, 2.10, or 2.25, or 2.40, the diameter suddenly jumps up an inch to 26.0 - 26.2, because the side casing is longer than on a 1.95, which is basically a relatively wide road bike tire with some extra tread on it.

    So what's the gist of the post? If you ride a 26 x 1.95 on a trail, as Sparticus says it is drastically inferior. Clearance is horrible, bumps are amplified, downhill steering is handicapped. But...there is a solution. 2.5, 2.7, 2.8, 3.0 sizes. 26 x 2.5 and 2.7, maybe 2.8 should be able to fit in your front fork (the back may only be able to take 2.1 to 2.5). You can also buy a 27.5" fork and then put in a 26 x 3.0 tire. The wider 26" tires are not drastically inferior. They may not be as good all-around as 27.5 tires but they are at least in the same range of performance. My 26 x 2.8 can handle chunkier/ruttier stuff significantly better than my 27.5 x 2.5. So if you still have a 26" bike you should really try out wider 2.5, 2.7, or 2.8 tires, you might be surprised what they can do on the trail.
    Mostly we can have fun on any bike. I rode a Trek 8900 from 1998 to 2017 with 26ers. Now on a 29, I have just as much fun. A bit different as it does some things better and some not so much. But in the end, no matter what bike I am on, it is a blast. So now I am using Di2 and eTap soon to be AXS user, still having the same fun with less maintenance and a touch less frustration but before 29, now with and who knows what down the road, it is always going to be a ton of fun and I get my life extending exercise to boot. I will ride anything I can get a leg over and smile.

  83. #683
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    Similar situation here as well.

    Something else we going through these days is 27.2, what's the point?

    We've got a brace of 27.2 seatposts.

    Now we're in the habit of using dropper posts, and 27.2 is just too skinny and niche for many options. However there are a few out there.

    Who ride's 26 & 27.2 with a dropper post? Who has drilled into an old 26" seat tube to create a stealth cable routing? Would anyone dare to?

    I don't, but I'm telling you right now I probably will do these things one day...well maybe not.

    So will my wife. She's got a nice 26'er.

    Back in the day there was a whole different approach obviously, where we'd just get back and sort of stiffen up the core and suck the seat into the gut toake it down the steepest sections. It was nuts. Sometimes we'd get stuck back there! Remember that?

    Last weekend I saw a guy on a pristine 94' Bontrager. It looked like a BMX bike next to all the long legged low and slack FS bikes on the summit. But it still looked slick.





    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    Why drill because you want a seat post. I have a 31.6 on my 26" and have no dropper post. My Thomson Masterpiece is good enough and when needed I lower the post manually. While doing that I have time to look at the beautiful sky I am above and the landscape through the holes in the sky. I use my bike to get fresh air enjoy the mountains and to stay reasonably fit. I do not use Strava or stopwatch. Would not get more fun out of that. After getting from sea level to mountain top I stop and enjoy the fresh air. Old and stubborn. What do I care?
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  84. #684
    Specialized
    Reputation: Seb K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    967
    If you can't find anything for 26 then go 27.5 . I still ride 26 but my forks are for 27.5 . I will never go to larger wheels simply from my test ride of a 29er that put me off . I like a lighter more nimble bike . A larger wheel will go over bumps better but climbs slowly (IME) and turns slower (IME) . I had a month to test ride a Cube and never again . Youngsters are growing up with 29ers so of course they will be bias towards it (like me and 26) but the bottom line is there are pros and cons to both and one is not better than the other .

  85. #685
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    There were retro-grouches back then screaming bloody murder because "what the hell's wrong with my 1" quill stem?" and "threads are the real deal bro!" I distinctly remember when people (lots of them) thought index shifting was bullcrap.

    I worked in shops most of my life and almost every "standard" change has been met with resistance. A new stem is about $30. Wider is better
    Wider is better; if you are as big as Arnold Schwarzeneggerr absolutely or if you are riding a Harley Davidson.
    When I started riding a handlebar was 45 - 50cm wide. Then I got a 60cm and me being rather wide over the shoulders (for my height) that was no problem but when I see the little guys riding here with 70cm plus wide handlebars and having a hard time controlling them I must admit that marketing bullshit is really profitable.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  86. #686
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Said who? For a lot of guys it's about being faster than your mates. Or faster than some guy you don't even know who also has a sad app on his phone.
    Poor guys, then they do not see the beauty of the mountains they are riding in (we are riding mountain bikes yeah?).
    Lucky Luke was faster than his shadow, but he was riding a horse.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  87. #687
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by OneTrustMan View Post
    Like something between 80 to 130 dollar.
    I can find only stuff for like 250 up to 500 dollar.
    Try eBay and find a 20mm and reduce it to 15.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  88. #688
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Nice. I remember being able to tell who had been out on the trails recently by looking at tire tracks.
    Some of the places I ride I see that only goats have been there before me.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  89. #689
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Spent the evening taking a 26er down in the garage and getting it ready for a bike packing trip this weekend.

    Contrary to the modern ultra-light style of bike packing, the 26er has been my camping bike of choice due to the fact that the wheel size and frame fits the old BOB trailer.

    For just an overnighter, we will reach our campsite well before noon, and drop the gear, and then go riding off all afternoon. Then we'll do another loop on Sunday before hitching the trailer.

    This bike has a custom 9 speed microdrive triple, and a 36t rear cassette. Because of this, the loaded trailer can be pulled up almost anything.

    It's all so passe. But I am seriously looking forward to riding it on some of my favorite trails.

    I had to scare up a stem, bars, grips, seatpost, new front disc brake pads, and a saddle from my stores.
    I put on a dropper post and a new Brooks B17 black leather saddle.

    It's going to be running tubes! I'll carry spare innertubes.

    On the testride it felt great to ride 26 again.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  90. #690
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: str8edgMTBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,899
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    Spent the evening taking a 26er down in the garage and getting it ready for a bike packing trip this weekend.

    Contrary to the modern ultra-light style of bike packing, the 26er has been my camping bike of choice due to the fact that the wheel size and frame fits the old BOB trailer.

    For just an overnighter, we will reach our campsite well before noon, and drop the gear, and then go riding off all afternoon. Then we'll do another loop on Sunday before hitching the trailer.

    This bike has a custom 9 speed microdrive triple, and a 36t rear cassette. Because of this, the loaded trailer can be pulled up almost anything.

    It's all so passe. But I am seriously looking forward to riding it on some of my favorite trails.

    I had to scare up a stem, bars, grips, seatpost, new front disc brake pads, and a saddle from my stores.
    I put on a dropper post and a new Brooks B17 black leather saddle.

    It's going to be running tubes! I'll carry spare innertubes.

    On the testride it felt great to ride 26 again.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    wow...a 26er AND running tubes...you definitely don't know what you are doing!!!


    Go practice. Figure it out. - Fleas

    15 Surly Krampus - King Amongst Bikes
    LET IT SNOW!

  91. #691
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by sXeXBMXer View Post
    wow...a 26er AND running tubes...you definitely don't know what you are doing!!!


    Ha ha!

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  92. #692
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by sXeXBMXer View Post
    wow...a 26er AND running tubes...you definitely don't know what you are doing!!!


    Riding a 26 he knows. Hope he brings enough tubes. Very old rims cannot be made tubeless and safe at the same time
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  93. #693
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    I'll follow up with a ride report. I usually ride tubeless. I've been doing this kind of camping at least once a year, and I usually do get at least one flat.

    You guys are posers with your superior attitudes. Chill.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  94. #694
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: str8edgMTBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,899
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    I'll follow up with a ride report. I usually ride tubeless. I've been doing this kind of camping at least once a year, and I usually do get at least one flat.

    You guys are posers with your superior attitudes. Chill.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    also will want the ride report just to see your trip...love seeing where and how people go...helps me plan for mine!
    Go practice. Figure it out. - Fleas

    15 Surly Krampus - King Amongst Bikes
    LET IT SNOW!

  95. #695
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Went bike packing with the 1996 Dean 26" Titanium hardtail this weekend. It fits the old BOB Ibex trailer we have.

    What's the point?

    The combination allows me to carry me and my wife's gear for a trip into the back-country. The BOB trailer will only fit a 26" wheel. It works really well. I used to do a lot of trail work with it back in the day. It's had loads of use.

    Because I have other bikes, in recent years this bike only gets used with the BOB trailer for special activities.

    It's still shod with innertubes. It's not a race or a KOM machine. It's a nice old bike!

    Last week, anticipating the camping trip I had to make sure it was ready for duty. The 26'er was found hanging with some parts pillaged for other duties.

    A KS manual dropper post fit, and a despised unused Brooks B17 saddle floating around in the garage went on it, seeing as there wasn't a spare saddle around otherwise.

    That saddle turned out to be terrible for steep technical climbs. I really know better, but I gave it a try anyway.

    The bottom bracket was shot. Found that out on a test ride over to a friend's house. Luckily I found a spare in the garage.

    It also needed a handlebar, grips, and a stem.

    Flats were expected, but none occurred this time. 28# PSI front and 32# PSI rear was a good setting for this.

    On the front is a GEAX Lobo mas Loco 2.5" DH tire. On the rear is a Kenda Telonix 2.35" tire. These tires are heavy and tough, with deep knobs, still, after many years of sporadic use.

    The fork is a 2002 Marzocchi air fork which has had one complete factory rebuild in it's life. I works amazingly great, still. It's certainly a bit twist-flexy, and that's part of the overall suspension effect as I see it.

    The hydraulic front brake is part of an XT brifter, from the days of the "low normal" rear derailleur.

    On the back is an XTR V-brake, hooked up to an ancient XTR cable shift/brake pod. This piece works flawlessly. There's a Shimano carbon brake booster bridge to keep the thin titanium seat stays from spreading when pulling on the brakes. It feels good and firm.

    What's the point?

    All these old bike parts which are a pleasure to operate are survivors with countless hours of duty.

    Shifting the front triple is a humble LX top pull derailleur. On the rear, attached to a solid integral 6/4 titanium hanger is a Deore derailleur that handles the 36t cassette.

    The front cranks are mixed. 175 Ritchey Logic with my pick 20, 29, and 36t chainrings, on the right of the JIS taper BB, and an orphan, last issue of XT JIS crank on the left.

    The resulting ratios make it possible to tow a real load up real singletrack. At the same time, I can climb up some of the steepest stuff possible.

    What's the point?

    Going uphill is the strong suit of this 26" bike. As well, after coming off riding 29" bikes most of the time, the switchbacks seem bigger, and the bike feels sprightly and nimble.

    Yes going downhill is a good hair raising experience. It's a blast. This was the first time I descended on this bike with a dropper post. What a hoot!

    I expected to get a flat somewhere, but didn't. One thing I did was to prevent the front tire from rotating on the rim on the hard braking on the steep and fast descents, which shears the inner-tube at the base of the valve. I did this using a trick I learned from a friend, which is to insert some pieces of inner-tube between the bead and the rim.

    Laugh out loud, it works.

    Back in the day, flats were just an accepted part of mountain bike life. Repairs were opportunities to take a break and enjoy the scenery.

    What's the point of it all?

    For me it's all about getting out there and spending quality time immersed in nature and rugged adventure with no one breathing down my neck away from fools and stupid rules.


    Last edited by Jack Burns; 04-15-2019 at 12:05 AM.

  96. #696
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,021
    I like that Dean. The bike packing thing doesn't do it for me, but I'd happily have that bike as a main rider if I had to.
    All the gear and no idea.

  97. #697
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    32
    The point of a 26'er for me now was price. I put a rigid fork on my 29'er and wanted a comfortable winter/easy singletrack bike. A fatbike is heavy IMO so I looked for a FS bike. Found a 2013 Canyon Nerve Cf Ltd used four times according to the owner. The bike looked new. Got a sub 11 kg bike for 2k$. Very happy with the ride. I'm 62 and not a racer so for my use this is a Great bike. Riding now with 2.35 Ice Spiker Pro, light and ni ble.

  98. #698
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    That's the point!

    Some live for being first and some of us have other priorities.

    Fresh air beautiful scenery.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  99. #699
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by lumpsum View Post
    The point of a 26'er for me now was price. I put a rigid fork on my 29'er and wanted a comfortable winter/easy singletrack bike. A fatbike is heavy IMO so I looked for a FS bike. Found a 2013 Canyon Nerve Cf Ltd used four times according to the owner. The bike looked new. Got a sub 11 kg bike for 2k$. Very happy with the ride. I'm 62 and not a racer so for my use this is a Great bike. Riding now with 2.35 Ice Spiker Pro, light and ni ble.
    Let's see that Canyon!

    It's probably one the finest expressions and renditions of a 26" bike, and with disc brakes.

    How big of a tire can you fit in the rear?

    For me, the bigger the better.

    But back in the day I was one of those who would pick lightweight 1.9-1.95 tires and run them hard. Pizza Cutters!

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  100. #700
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    543
    26-ers: Ride 'em if you got 'em.

  101. #701
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,433
    Quote Originally Posted by Radium View Post
    26-ers: Ride 'em if you got 'em.
    Totes.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  102. #702
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    I like that Dean. The bike packing thing doesn't do it for me, but I'd happily have that bike as a main rider if I had to.
    It's not bad, thanks. I have two of these frames. One's set up as a single speed. I haven't ridden that one yet this year. Next month, probably taking that one out.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  103. #703
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    16
    They came with the bike I bought and do the job they are meant to do. I may go bigger one day.

  104. #704
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Took the old 96' Dean camping again last weekend, pulling a BOB trailer to a basecamp.

    In a photo below, taken by a companion, it climbs over a hard bit of dirt road.

    My buddy is pushing his 22" titanium hardtail. He has one of those bolt-on racks to carry most of his gear. He uninstalls it once at camp for the ride of the day.

    Problem is that his frame has developed a slowly lengthening crack at the seat-tube/top tube area. This crack started over a year ago.

    Since he's so tall, he has a lot of seat mast out, and even with a 400mm post, the amount of flex, plus regular bike-packing using the rear rack, is ruining that frame, and he must abandon that frame.

    I can't remember what this thread is about. If it's 26'ers or bikes older than 10 years, there's two of them in this photo.

    I did change the saddle. The Brooks B19 is terrible for mountain biking.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  105. #705
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    208
    Short people need 26" wheels. My wife has short legs for her height and can't get comfortable on a 27.5 dually and can only fit a few a 27.5 hardtails. Even her CX bike was converted from 700C to 26". Kid's bikes also benefit since 26" wheels can be used to make a mini 29er.
    Also cheap skates like me, I bough an expensive 26" wheel bike over 10 years ago because of how it handled the local trails and I see no reason to change.
    2009 Redline Conquest Pro, 2008 Trek Fuel Ex8
    2007 Kona Cinder Cone utility bike
    Yes I spent too much on bikes.

  106. #706
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    I recall that a very well known biker said that the most fun he ever had on a bike was on one with 24" wheels. No reason short people should not have fun.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  107. #707
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by SlowJoeCrow View Post
    Short people need 26" wheels. My wife has short legs for her height and can't get comfortable on a 27.5 dually and can only fit a few a 27.5 hardtails. Even her CX bike was converted from 700C to 26". Kid's bikes also benefit since 26" wheels can be used to make a mini 29er.
    Also cheap skates like me, I bough an expensive 26" wheel bike over 10 years ago because of how it handled the local trails and I see no reason to change.
    Fellow cheap skate here. My motto is, if it works, ride it. I do not race, do not have time for "epic rides" with my bike buds anymore, and ride mainly for exercise and to get away from it all. No reason I can't do that on my 26er.

    ...although due to a bad fork, my 26er is about to return to rigid 69er mode.
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  108. #708
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bridgestone14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,058
    Can you get your fork fixed?
    Looking for a Medium Scott Scale frame, preferably a 2012 in 26.

  109. #709
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by skankingbiker View Post
    Fellow cheap skate here. My motto is, if it work s, ride it. I do not race, do not have time for "epic rides" with my bike buds anymore, and ride mainly for exercise and to get away from it all. No reason I can't do that on my 26er.

    ...although due to a bad fork, my 26er is about to return to rigid 69er mode.
    I rode for 5 years on mixed level group rides with a 26” bike they called “boat anchor”. I outride all of them. I told them I was thinking of buying a new bike and they said, “we won’t be able to ride with you anymore, you’ll be too fast”. I got the bike, a pivot Mach 5.5... and now I only ride alone(2 rides), and on my first ride, it felt slower. GO 26!!!

  110. #710
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,952
    Quote Originally Posted by gangstamaxx View Post
    I got the bike, a pivot Mach 5.5...it felt slower.
    I would imagine a larger wheeled bike could feel slower, even if it was actually faster. Which for me, unless you are racing, defeats the purpose.

  111. #711
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    543
    Quote Originally Posted by gangstamaxx View Post
    I rode for 5 years on mixed level group rides with a 26” bike they called “boat anchor”. I outride all of them. I told them I was thinking of buying a new bike and they said, “we won’t be able to ride with you anymore, you’ll be too fast”. I got the bike, a pivot Mach 5.5... and now I only ride alone(2 rides), and on my first ride, it felt slower. GO 26!!!
    Sounds like you got shyte for riding buddies. I had the same experience when I bought a 29er.

  112. #712
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    26 and counting.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  113. #713
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bridgestone14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by gangstamaxx View Post
    I rode for 5 years on mixed level group rides with a 26” bike they called “boat anchor”. I outride all of them. I told them I was thinking of buying a new bike and they said, “we won’t be able to ride with you anymore, you’ll be too fast”. I got the bike, a pivot Mach 5.5... and now I only ride alone(2 rides), and on my first ride, it felt slower. GO 26!!!
    Are you running your 5.5 with plus tires then?
    Looking for a Medium Scott Scale frame, preferably a 2012 in 26.

  114. #714
    Trail Gnome
    Reputation: griz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,934

    Good job!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    Took the old 96' Dean camping again last weekend, pulling a BOB trailer to a basecamp.

    In a photo below, taken by a companion, it climbs over a hard bit of dirt road.

    My buddy is pushing his 22" titanium hardtail. He has one of those bolt-on racks to carry most of his gear. He uninstalls it once at camp for the ride of the day.

    Problem is that his frame has developed a slowly lengthening crack at the seat-tube/top tube area. This crack started over a year ago.

    Since he's so tall, he has a lot of seat mast out, and even with a 400mm post, the amount of flex, plus regular bike-packing using the rear rack, is ruining that frame, and he must abandon that frame.

    I can't remember what this thread is about. If it's 26'ers or bikes older than 10 years, there's two of them in this photo.

    I did change the saddle. The Brooks B19 is terrible for mountain biking.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    That bike looks a little small for you...much like my old hard tail.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-76538654-6dfe-4289-81b8-ef455da37ef3.jpg  


  115. #715
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Wonderful adventure. I give you a ton of credit for pulling a trailer and loading up your bike. I am sure I would not do as well. I just hate anything hanging off my bike and I have enough issues getting up long climbs without all that weight. Ya done good.

  116. #716
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    Quote Originally Posted by griz View Post
    That bike looks a little small for you...much like my old hard tail.
    Maybe you're right.

    Seems as though your thesis is that the old paradigm geometry/bike fit of the mid 90's tended to size everyone down. Probably true.

    I know that bar end extensions are welcome on these bikes, especially when I had to use the narrower handlebars from the period.

    Wider bars, beyond 720mm, mitigate that to some extent.

    Also, perhaps the photo/lens doesn't properly exhibit fit.

    Still, yeah, come to think of it, a longer top tube would feel much better.

    I have other bikes with different geometry and the difference is discernable.

    One of the 26" single speeds I have has a longer top tube, and it climbs and fits better in that regard, although the bike itself is a bit porky.

    There's probably a thread listing longer an slacker 26" frames. I should go over there and read up on the topic.

    In any case, I'll ride and maintain my bikes as long as I can.

    Recently my wife has been criticizing my spending habits on bike parts, and I know she has a valid point. Stoked I have a good stash of obsolete parts obtained for cheap!

  117. #717
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    Recently my wife has been criticizing my spending habits on bike parts, and I know she has a valid point. Stoked I have a good stash of obsolete parts obtained for cheap!
    I am regularly told that the parts not needed should not be occupying space.
    Will have to do a clean-up.
    It is hard though, some of the parts not needed should be used by some not fortunate enough to buy new.
    That might never happen.
    Clean-up is needed soon.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  118. #718
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,081
    Another 26 built up and (almost) ready to ride. Seized SRAM brakes...

  119. #719
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    13
    Still ride my 25 year old Ventana Marble Peak. Rides just fine. Still have the 8 speed drive train. No reason to upgrade to the larger wheels. Besides, I just can't justify $3k for new bike. Actually, been looking to find a pre-Trek Bontrager steel frame and building that up for a second bike.

  120. #720
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudguard View Post
    Few will say this is not a good bike because it has 26" wheels. It sure is nice.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  121. #721
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    15

    Why??

    Because this cost me 1g and it is AWESOME!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-steed.jpg  


  122. #722
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    547
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewT View Post
    Because this cost me 1g and it is AWESOME!
    I am very sure it is. And I am the type that buys cars, bikes, trucks and never sells em until they are beyond dead. But my thinking has changed for two reasons.

    1. There has been a tremendous technology improvements in materials, equipment and methods. All result is a safer and usually more fun products. All lost when we operate decades old equipment.

    2. Parts become unavailable over time and sometimes are never located in the used parts market. This renders your car/truck/bike unusable in many cases.

    I gave my 26incher away last year which I owned since 1998, Trek 8900. 29er wheels were weird but I adjusted in ten minutes. Ride what you like.

  123. #723
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,159
    It's ten years old this year but its custom built to my long, low, slack numbers and has Ti coils front and rear. I'll ride it 'till the frame breaks.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-bzz-011-800x594-.jpg  

    26? What's the point??!!-ag-044.jpg  

    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  124. #724
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedalon2018 View Post
    I am very sure it is. And I am the type that buys cars, bikes, trucks and never sells em until they are beyond dead. But my thinking has changed for two reasons.

    1. There has been a tremendous technology improvements in materials, equipment and methods. All result is a safer and usually more fun products. All lost when we operate decades old equipment.
    You were or still are?

    Anyway: Dream customers like you are favourites for all marketing bureaus.
    A 1xwhatever can never change as fast to lowest gear as a 2x or 3x, a long 29’er may be faster but not nearly as manoeuvrable as a short 26’er.
    Parts do not exist? If they could be made before they can again. Do it yourself is not dead for all of us.
    That beautiful yellow titan sprung bike is a dream and so are many of the other bikes in this forum.
    Also not everybody want to spend or can spend as much as the industri want us to.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  125. #725
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    It's ten years old this year but its custom built to my long, low, slack numbers and has Ti coils front and rear. I'll ride it 'till the frame breaks.
    What is your fork?

  126. #726
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    14
    The toughest guy around here owns Atomic Cycles and storms on a modified beach cruiser. MTB started with these 26 inch wheels. But we forgot that beach cruisers had big tires - along the way the 26 bike was skinnied up, micro drive, all had to be lighter, 17mm ID rims with 1.95 tires. The full sus and hard tail I ride both support 60x559 tires front and back, mounted on 23-29mm ID rims and they are unstoppable. 2x9 keeps the front derailleur out of the tire. I tried a 1x bike and it was plain stupid. No way I'm riding miles to the trail head in a 32 x 11 (or 10) with ridiculous chain line. But I do appreciate how the 27.5/29er setups reminded me how a 26er should be put together.

  127. #727
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,159
    Quote Originally Posted by gnatsOnTeeth View Post
    The toughest guy around here owns Atomic Cycles and storms on a modified beach cruiser. MTB started with these 26 inch wheels. But we forgot that beach cruisers had big tires - along the way the 26 bike was skinnied up, micro drive, all had to be lighter, 17mm ID rims with 1.95 tires. The full sus and hard tail I ride both support 60x559 tires front and back, mounted on 23-29mm ID rims and they are unstoppable. 2x9 keeps the front derailleur out of the tire. I tried a 1x bike and it was plain stupid. No way I'm riding miles to the trail head in a 32 x 11 (or 10) with ridiculous chain line. But I do appreciate how the 27.5/29er setups reminded me how a 26er should be put together.
    Your post brings back memories I hadn't thought about in a long time. Atomic was the ambassador to Mountain Cycle frames from the 90s to the mid 00s. The German blonde with the Chi dog would always let me demo her bikes at Summit.

    I've ran a single 36 since six speed, but I'm a single speeder at heart so I'll disagree on the latter.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  128. #728
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,159
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudguard View Post
    What is your fork?
    Marzocchi 44 RC3 Micro Ti with 150mm of travel. (Ti coil spring in an oil bath)
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  129. #729
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    14
    Vader your point is well taken. I meant to say over cross country distances. My car bike is often SS, and I'll grind hills when they're in the way. But the off road slopes here are steep. It's a balance. 32x36 on the 60-559 rolls up a 30% grade. 42x11 hauls down pavement back home. It is noble to alternately grind and spin over twenty miles with a SS, in fact SS makes sense. And 1X for downhill does too. But a $200 12 speed cassette with 50 and 10 tooth cogs? 2x9 strikes a perfect balance for efficiency: less expensive chain, less friction from poor chain line, more rollers in play under high torque. For my two 26er bikes, 2x9 allows running a big rear tire. With a triple the tire hits the derailleur.

  130. #730
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Marzocchi 44 RC3 Micro Ti with 150mm of travel. (Ti coil spring in an oil bath)
    Ah I've been looking for some of those. They'd go really nicely on my 2004 Enduro SX.

  131. #731
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    "That bike looks a little small for you...much like my old hard tail."

    I was on the same 26" bike pulling a BOB trailer this weekend in a two night three day bike ride.

    The fit was just as it ever was after all these years. I've always had to set the handlebars as low as they go without hitting the top tube. The reach defined by a stem in the 80-110 zone. The seat pretty much centered on the seat tube.

    But I did think more on the overall fit of the bike, and I have to agree that it does feel a bit small. I never thought of it that way before.

    Since I have other more current geometry bikes and wheel sized bikes I have to concede that the newer rides do seem to be more comfortable and capable than the old 26ers.

    I have a seat dropper post down in the photo below.

    Anyway, while I never really needed them last weekend, despite the extreme at times grades we we're climbing, bar ends did cross my mind. I'm sure the climbing would have gone even better with bar ends.

    And I got to thinking that maybe the entire cottage industry of bar ends back in the 90's existed because the bikes of the era didn't or never did fit right.

    We could blame it on the narrow handlebars of the time as well.

    I love grabbing the big horns of bar ends on the steepest climbs. I love them too, because of my hand positions

    But maybe one reason why bar ends on and old 26" is because the top tube is too short.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  132. #732
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,458
    I love me some 26" bikes. Tire size isn't what's holding them back. It's geometry. If I could get a good deal on a 26" with modern geometry I'd be all over it.

    I've got a perfectly (for me) built Large Mojo HD & it really is great. But the short top tube, short reach & tall seat tube makes it less capable than my other Medium Kona Process 153 27.5" bike, which has considerably worse suspension. Although it's been upgraded since the pic below, new debonair air shaft up front, Monarch RC3 out back with standard air can & pnw bachelor dropper. It's now my go to bike, the HD which I thought I'd keep forever is soon to be on the chopping block. I'll still have 4 26's after it is sold, although none of them are for hitting the local gnar.

    The more modern geometry allows for easy & comfortable air time & flat cornering grip. The older geometry more difficult to control in the air & wants to wash out a bit more on flat corners... Straight line chunder & climbing, the 26" wins.

    Take a look at where the bottom bracket is on both bikes below. See how the Ibis BB is in line with the seat tube, the Kona, looks like it's pulled back an inch or so. That's where the expanded reach numbers are coming from & it makes a HUGE difference in stability. Doesn't mean 26's aren't immensely capable, but that's one reason why newer bikes are better, nothing to do with the wheel size. New geometry for new trails.

    I've added the grand daddy just to show how long the idustry has been holding onto that tight reach...1983 Ritchey.

    L '12 Mojo HD : M '15 Kona Process 153
    Top Tube : 23.8 : 23.6
    Reach : 405 approx : 435
    Seat Tube : 19" : 16"
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-new-seat.jpg  

    26? What's the point??!!-works-1.5-angleset-installed-1.jpg  

    26? What's the point??!!-jun-2018-ride-small.jpg  

    83 Ritchey Everest
    88 Mountain Goat Whiskeytown Racer
    95 Bianchi Mega Tube ti
    2012 Ibis Mojo HD
    2015 Kona Process 153

  133. #733
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BKKFARANG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    29

    8 years and counting

    26er Because it been on both sides of the globe with me!26? What's the point??!!-bike.jpg

  134. #734
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    15
    That is porno hot!!

  135. #735
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    292
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    I believe that they're arguing but I just can't figure out why. Sort of like most of this thread.
    In a road riding group mishap, when riders crash and pile up. A hot disc rotor can be a potential slicer.

    That's my first thought and I didn't read any of the roadie articles.
    d butt u kicked today, could b d same butt you'll kiss tomorrow.....

  136. #736
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Sickmak90's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    935
    I still miss my old Cannondale Rush SL6. If it would have been the correct size I would have kept it.

    I bought into the 29er hype and got a 29er HT. I rode it for 4 years and honestly I never liked it much. I didn’t realize how much I dislike it until I got my 27.5 FS. I do like the 27.5 but I miss the 26er. I ran super aggressive tires on the 26er and rolling resistance was never an issue. Even with a 1x9 setup on the 26er it was awesome.

  137. #737
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    76
    I never understood the desire to go for a bigger frame... when I bought my '99 Schwinn Homegrown Factory Team frame in 1998, I actually went from a 19" frame to 17" and felt immediately at home. I ride on the technical east coast trails, and I've always felt like the smaller frame allowed me to shift my weight better, than the bigger frame. A while back I tried wider handlebars - and I never liked them - it felt like riding a school bus with the huge steering wheel.
    It probably sounds a little cliche, but I thought that a smaller bike would be more an extension of me, than a larger one. I share many of the opinions written in this thread... I don't agree that there is anything holding the 26er back... I think people changed, riding flowy trails is now the thing, and the twisty technical trails that hug the edge, and snake between trees are uncool... still I like riding offroad regardless of how "outdated" my bikes are. The only part I miss is browsing magazines/online for the stuff I was going to put on my bikes - almost nothing out there fits my bikes anymore.

  138. #738
    mtbr member
    Reputation: las-palmas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    I never understood the desire to go for a bigger frame... when I bought my '99 Schwinn Homegrown Factory Team frame in 1998, I actually went from a 19" frame to 17" and felt immediately at home. I ride on the technical east coast trails, and I've always felt like the smaller frame allowed me to shift my weight better, than the bigger frame. A while back I tried wider handlebars - and I never liked them - it felt like riding a school bus with the huge steering wheel.
    It probably sounds a little cliche, but I thought that a smaller bike would be more an extension of me, than a larger one. I share many of the opinions written in this thread... I don't agree that there is anything holding the 26er back... I think people changed, riding flowy trails is now the thing, and the twisty technical trails that hug the edge, and snake between trees are uncool... still I like riding offroad regardless of how "outdated" my bikes are. The only part I miss is browsing magazines/online for the stuff I was going to put on my bikes - almost nothing out there fits my bikes anymore.
    Excellent describing my point of view that we are riding a mountain bike and not a Harley Davidson. In my eyes these extreme handlebars I see around would fit Arnold Schwarzenegger and not guys my size (and smaller). But everybody should do what makes them happy.
    I put new parts on my bike when those on it are worn out and so far have had no problems finding what I need.
    it is harder to get fit than to stay fit

  139. #739
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ladljon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    343

    Moots Zirkel with new fork

    After 10yrs of trying to get use to a telescopic fork, finally went back to a parallelogram fork....and I thought my new bike (now 9yrs old) handled worst than my last bike. it was just the fork....ran a AMP F-4 for 12yrs....so much fun now.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-fullsizeoutput_3ec.jpg  

    Tread killer....

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Park City Point to Point spot for sale - $200
    By VerkerBee in forum Endurance XC Racing
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-23-2017, 07:13 AM
  2. park city point to point info. needed
    By butryon in forum Utah
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-13-2013, 03:35 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-16-2013, 09:57 AM
  4. Point to Point Mountain Bike Race Logistics
    By playpunk in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-01-2011, 06:55 PM
  5. Park City Point to Point entry available for transfer!
    By jabezecny in forum Endurance XC Racing
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-26-2011, 11:13 AM

Members who have read this thread: 298

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.