Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 501 to 600 of 619
  1. #501
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,821
    Manitou and XFusion make 26" forks with straight steerers at reasonable prices.

  2. #502
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,875
    would you be interested in a 2010 Marzocchi 55 RC3 ti w/ an Avalanche cartridge, straight 1/8 steerer?
    Quote Originally Posted by Brodino View Post
    I have seen those Fox forks too but at $900 I ruled them out due to cost. It was just throwing money away i thought. I am now keeping an eye on Ebay but so far nothing. I think I am now leaning towards just buying newer used bike just for the ease of finding parts. It just sucks because minus the crappy fork I have, the rest of my bike is in decent shape.
    breezy shade

  3. #503
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,482
    It's been a good long time since I posted my feelings about my 26" AMHT vs my 29+ AMHT...I did a head to head review elsewhere, but since my thread here popped back up, I thought I'd do a long term review follow-up.

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



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



    26? What's the point??!!-1198941d1526822865-26-staunch-hold-out-clown-wheels-img_20180518_182251264-picsay.jpg
    Subject 1: 2005 Freeride Hardtail (which today translates as "All Mountain Hardtail")

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




    26? What's the point??!!-1198942d1526822947-26-staunch-hold-out-clown-wheels-img_20180518_163702248_tojp-picsay.jpg
    Subject 2: 2017 Trek Stache All Mountain Hardtail

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




    26? What's the point??!!-1198943d1526823007-26-staunch-hold-out-clown-wheels-img_20170812_164312302-picsay.jpg
    On paper, they look very similar except for the obvious wheel size difference. Almost like you altered one to fit the wheels of the other.

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

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

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

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

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

    26? What's the point??!!-1198940d1526822801-26-staunch-hold-out-clown-wheels-collagemaker_20180518_201056206-picsay.jpg

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

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



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

    Though I still ride it.
    26? What's the point??!!-img_20180527_203452375-picsay.jpg
    Last edited by chelboed; 07-05-2018 at 10:41 AM.

  4. #504
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,702
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbmike24 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    Thats the thing getting parts. I recently wanted to get some rim brake wheels...ugh that was a pain.

    People say that you can still get this or that...and yes you can, if you look at the bottom end of the craptastic market, but I really don't want to put a low end boat anchor fork or some cheep heavy flexy rims on my top end frame that I love to bits, I want the good stuff.
    You have to like hit up ebay for NOS that may or may be legit, or go 2nd hand which could get you something good, or get you someone else's old crap that needs a rebuild more than the stuff you're replacing.
    On top of in these parts of the world, either people figure out early that there was going to be a demand for old parts, or they just wanted top dollar from the start, but stuff ain't cheap.

    Took me 2 minutes of searching eBay found a brand new rim brake wheel set XTR 970 rim brake tubeless 9 speed wheels 948.00 bucks plus 60 shipping yikes that's steep for those wheels but they are top of the line just like you looking for. Also found a load more of nice rim brake wheel sets as well.
    what i was meaning is that they don't make that stuff any more except at the bottom end...which is totally understandable, you don't stay in business catering to ultra niche markets just to keep me happy, although I'd like it if they did.
    And yes I buy heaps of ebay, but when the major supply is on the other side of the planet, then hings become an issue, dodgy sellers, issues where you might have to send stuff back, makes you 2nd guess everything.
    Just saying, 10 years ago there was so much stuff around it was easy, 5 years, less stuff, 2 years even less, now less again. Now I don't need anything right now, I'e gotten pretty much what I need for the moment, but in 5 years time? I'm sure there will be stuff around, or at least I hope.
    All the gear and no idea.

  5. #505
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Well I'll throw in my $.02... I rode in the late 90s/early 00s on a stump jumper 26er. Then came a long stretch where I didn't mtb at all. Early last year I test rode (and ultimately bought) a used '08 Surly KM 29er. I d4mn near flooded the basement when I first rode this thing. I was truly impressed.

    To give a background, I AM a retrogrouch. I drive a stick shift truck, ride a 1975 Honda motorcycle and I don't give verbal commands to my electronic devices. So this isn't coming from a trend-chaser by any stretch of the imagination.

    I then pulled out the old stumpy some months later (that had been sitting in storage for years) and gave it a spin. It somehow all of a sudden felt small to me. Then again, I built up a 26er touring bike (surly LHT) two years back and that feels soooo fun to ride (not on technical stuff, but on roads and gravel).

    So I guess what I've concluded is the 29ers CAN be bad a$$. And 26ers can be bad a$$. It's never apples-to-apples because two bikes with two different wheel sizes are automatically geometrically dis-similar to begin with.

    You can most definitely count me in the save-the-26ers camp. But I'll stop short of bashing the 29ers. Yea sure, the bike industry is about making money. But 29ers have their place.

    I'm still not so sure of my stance on 650b, as I've yet to try one, but my sense is I prefer a bike to be brilliant in certain aspects rather than mediocre in all of them (i.e. give me killer rollover or killer nimble-ness, not a compromise in both)

    I'm also going to throw in the previously echoed prediction that 26ers, and 2" tires for that matter, make one hell of a comeback, likely by 2025. It's like horror movies - they're in they're out. they're in they're out.

  6. #506
    Special Ed
    Reputation: Neuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by MudSnow View Post
    In one of the most scientifically done comparisons of wheel size, done by world cup racers, 29ers were faster than 26ers by much less than half of 1% over a course several miles long.

    This is a car video, but it shows how two completely different vehicles with different strengths become very evenly matched by a mixture of track features.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIggM65KBRk
    Slightly older post but I like it still the same.

    I get tired of the word 'technology' being thrown around so much in the biking industry. Going from 26 to 29 or 27.5 is a change in sizing, not technology.

    I'm 5'8" and ride a 26 still. My friend is 6'4" and rides a 29. Neither bike is better than the other, they just fit the individual better.

    I ride 29s and I go slower. Not because of 'technology' but because it doesn't fit me as well. I feel I'm on a horse and don't perform the same.
    For me, it's not as nimble and I don't climb as well. My friend was slower on a 26 because it felt like a kids bike. It didn't accommodate his large frame. If someone does better on a 29 vs a 26 or visa versa, it's because the bike now fits their size and build better which is the most important factor. When they post these reviews, they need to post their height as well because it is a huge factor. I don't care what you ride as long as it fits.

    True bike tech or engineering is going to a new material like carbon or building something just as strong, durable, or rigid but in a lighter weight. Size change is not.

    In my riding experience of 25+ years, I've seen a lot of BS. The only reason changes are made in most components is so that the bike industry can sell new bikes, components or parts. In addition, the 'technology' hasn't changed much at all. Bikes still weigh 27-30lbs. Still get flat tires, taco'd wheels, warped rims or brake rotors, shocks that blow out or lock up. This one is faster, this one is lighter, this one is more rigid, this one will make you breakfast in the morning... It's all BS that the fools still soak up. Mean while, I'm still kicking everyone's ass on my '98 26" FS.

    I remember the bashing, flaming and trolling when gearing went from 3x8 to 3x9. It's better because A,B, and C. Now those same guys are arguing why 9-gears are better than 10 or 11! Just stupid getting sucked into what BS the manufacturers are trying to spin to their clients.

    And now here we go, full circle. I'm building up an old 26" for my son who has just started to outgrow his BMX bike, which BTW, he could smoke a lot of his friends on because it fit him well while they all had large 27.5" - 29" bikes their dads were told were great but are too big for them to control. Interesting that the majority of the components we're using are very similar to a 'new 26' that MTBR just published an article about - Cleary Bikes Scout 26” and 24” kid’s bikes - Mountain Bike Review- Mtbr.com
    Last edited by Neuner; 07-06-2018 at 05:52 AM.
    'Things you own...begin owning you.'

  7. #507
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    pilot must carefully choose his lines as not to destroy the nice wheelset or veer off trail.
    This is why I love mountain biking. Learned on the technical east coast trails, and the challenge of making it on a difficult section was and is the appeal that brings me back. I get it, that for some it is speed, comfort, ease that matter more... but there are many ways of enjoying mountain biking (it has always been that way). It's just sad that the industry started to dictate what this sport should be like.

  8. #508
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wightweenie26er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    It's just sad that the industry started to dictate what this sport should be like.

    I agree totally with you. Except nobody is forcing us to buy the new bikes. If people like me didn't buy the 29er etc then it would die off like so many 'new' & better' products that industry/retailers try to sell. I remember when digital watches came out. Now look they are only the mass market 20 watches. Analogue rules still on the expensive watches. And analogue still holds a large market share on lower price watches. The watch buyers didn't want digital. Other products have the same war, records, CD's and now downloads.
    Are mtb buyers different? Weren't they happy with 26er? I was and am very happy with 26'' wheels. Hopefully the 26er will make a return to mass market as before. It is the best wheel size for a mtb.

  9. #509
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    It's just sad that the industry started to dictate what this sport should be like.
    I kinda thought they always did?

  10. #510
    Special Ed
    Reputation: Neuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    I kinda thought they always did?
    Yup, at least as long as I've been around which has been a long time.


    I'm like Emax in that I enjoy the technical riding. I think of mountain biking as fast-hiking which most of the time includes technical routes. I'm out for the scenery and the experience, not just trying to go as fast as I can all the time although I can tear it up when I need to. This is what has made finding riding partners so hard. Every one of them that I've either met up with or introduced to the sport has turned into a racer. They go around all of the obstacles in an effort to be as fast as they can. Even widening a trail to avoid simple roots!! Later arguing about the 'technological' advances of their bikes...

    Now that I've gotten my son interested, all of his buddies are trying to get him to race, have a certain bike and wear specific clothing/helmet. Again, frustrating.
    'Things you own...begin owning you.'

  11. #511
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bluegill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Neuner View Post
    In my riding experience of 25+ years, I've seen a lot of BS. The only reason changes are made in most components is so that the bike industry can sell new bikes, components or parts. In addition, the 'technology' hasn't changed much at all. Bikes still weigh 27-30lbs. Still get flat tires, taco'd wheels, warped rims or brake rotors, shocks that blow out or lock up. This one is faster, this one is lighter, this one is more rigid, this one will make you breakfast in the morning... It's all BS that the fools still soak up. Mean while, I'm still kicking everyone's ass on my '98 26" FS.
    When I recently got back into the mountain bike scene I was really amazed at how much things have changed since I exited in the early-mid 2000s. Twenty-nine inch and 27.5 wheels, through-axles with multiple spacing, boost axles, the tapered vs straight steerer debate, 1X drivetrains, 42T rear cassettes, etc. Then I really looked into it and realized the big differences in frame geometry. I think it's a combination of technological advancement at the highest levels (actual for-profit sponsored racing) and good old marketing and capitalism. If you keep introducing newer and betterer pieces and parts then they'll keep sending you their money. The truly clever changes are the axle sizes because then you need to buy a new set of wheels while you're at it. If you don't then you risk instant death with last year's old axle size...as if any sport rider is even remotely affected by the typical axle stiffness.

    There are "kids" that now equate a pre-2015 mountain bike to a 1950s Schwinn. Dude, you gotta buy a new bike. You need a 29er with boost spacing and 150 mm travel or you're gonna die on the trails, man. I set out on a little experiment to see if I could upgrade my ancient-history 1998 Cannondale. I now have nearly all new, modern, technology on my caveman bike. I avoided a lot of hassle by keeping the Headshok but even that upgrade to a modern fork could be done with enough effort.

    I'll get around to buying a new or gently used 2017 or 2018 full suspension frame and build it up just to see what it's like, but I think the end result will be more hype than reality.

  12. #512
    mtbr member
    Reputation: plummet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    368
    I tell ya what's the shiz on a 26". Wheelies, manuals, nose manuals. All forms of trialling, street riding tomfoolery.
    My old school dmr trailstar is such a wheelie ing feind!

  13. #513
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    I kinda thought they always did?
    I don't think that's true. It took years for the industry to settle on the steerer/head tube diameter... but since the 31.8 handlebar diameter, to me it seems like we're being just fed new products. I never remember anyone complaining that 25.4mm diameter is too flexible - yet all the manufacturers switched to 31.8mm in a very short amount of time... I used to work in a bike shop and I never remember anyone saying: "gee.. mister I wish that handlebar was 31.8mm"... The problem I'm having with these changes is that these days the old standards are being abandoned for the new. And this is after a ton of bikes in old standard have been sold. Even in road bikes the industry is pushing for disc brakes - which make no sense on the road bike, but it clearly shows that the industry now makes a product, and the uses clever marketing techniques to sell it. They have the data that helps them to do that. I've stopped reading cycling magazines, because it's just a love-fest - everything being tested is great. The saddest part is that we as consumers are the losers - I look at some of the bikes out there and the prices are just crazy $6-$7k and you're getting a 27 pound bike... I'm not a weight weenie, but it just seems like someone is trying to trick me... just like when cnc purple everything was so great until it cracked and broke.

  14. #514
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,328
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    It took years for the industry to settle on the steerer/head tube diameter... but since the 31.8 handlebar diameter, to me it seems like we're being just fed new products. I never remember anyone complaining that 25.4mm diameter is too flexible - yet all the manufacturers switched to 31.8mm in a very short amount of time... I used to work in a bike shop and I never remember anyone saying: "gee.. mister I wish that handlebar was 31.8mm"..
    I agree. I preferred 25.4 because you had much more room for light brackets etc. There was nothing wrong with that size. I also totally agree that the industry is pushing unnecessary change on us at a ridiculous pace, probably because advances in design and manufacturing speed allow them to, but I still think they always dictated what bikes we got. They came up with the bikes and tech then sold it to us. I don't think the game has changed at all, only the pace of it.

  15. #515
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    I never remember anyone complaining that 25.4mm diameter is too flexible - yet all the manufacturers switched to 31.8mm in a very short amount of time... I used to work in a bike shop and I never remember anyone saying: "gee.. mister I wish that handlebar was 31.8mm"...

    I don't remember anyone complaining that 1" steer tubes were too flexible, or that quill stems were a problem, or square taper bb's, etc, etc. Seriously, never. Most improvements are incremental and are only realized in hindsight.

    From an engineering standpoint 31.8 makes more sense, and so do disc brakes on road bikes.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  16. #516
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,328
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    I don't remember anyone complaining that 1" steer tubes were too flexible, or that quill stems were a problem, or square taper bb's, etc, etc.
    Quill stems are shite! Come on, ahead-sets are so much better it's not funny. The thing about 31.8 bars is that I cannot see any actual advantage in the real world. The added strength is not needed, the extra weight is not welcome and being able to fit lights would be nice. I still remember cursing as I tried to clamp stuff to the tapered section of 31.8 bars. Seriously, how are they better?

  17. #517
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,651
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Quill stems are shite! Come on, ahead-sets are so much better it's not funny. The thing about 31.8 bars is that I cannot see any actual advantage in the real world. The added strength is not needed, the extra weight is not welcome and being able to fit lights would be nice. I still remember cursing as I tried to clamp stuff to the tapered section of 31.8 bars. Seriously, how are they better?
    So you can go buy a new stem to work with it. Now they've not only sold you a "new and improved" handlebar, but also a stem to go with it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oh My Sack! View Post
    Remember, there's always quilting and knitting if pedalling becomes too tough.

  18. #518
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Quill stems are shite! Come on, ahead-sets are so much better it's not funny. The thing about 31.8 bars is that I cannot see any actual advantage in the real world. The added strength is not needed, the extra weight is not welcome and being able to fit lights would be nice. I still remember cursing as I tried to clamp stuff to the tapered section of 31.8 bars. Seriously, how are they better?
    Good thing they aren't doing 35mm bars yet...

  19. #519
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Seriously, how are they better?
    Because a wider diameter bar can be built both stronger and lighter. How are they worse? Aside from your light bracket conundrum that is.


    Of course in 'retro'spect quill stems are inferior but until aheadsets became the norm (took about a year) no one, not even you Mr. Pig, realized it.

    All the old retro parts were skinny, fat is better!
    I brake for stinkbugs

  20. #520
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bridgestone14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,011
    I find my handlebars plenty stiff as it is honestly. I worry about trying 35 bc I already get sore hands from my thomson bar. Something that doesn't happen on my enve bar.
    Looking for a Medium Scott Scale frame, preferably a 2012 in 26.

  21. #521
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,702
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Because a wider diameter bar can be built both stronger and lighter. How are they worse? Aside from your light bracket conundrum that is.


    Of course in 'retro'spect quill stems are inferior but until aheadsets became the norm (took about a year) no one, not even you Mr. Pig, realized it.

    All the old retro parts were skinny, fat is better!
    Na, everybody knew quill stems were crap...that and the locknut headsets and threaded forks, it was all bad, having to adjust them, swapping anything...it was all just crap, everyone complained about them, all the time, but what else was there? Nothing, along comes threadless, bingo, solve all the issues with no real down side.
    Whereas 25.4 bars,everyone one was happy, but now 31.8 because it's "better"..er OK sure, can I have a new stem with that please.
    One was a step change to a different and much better system, the other is a tiny increment that may or may not actually have any benefit.

    And I'm not saying 31.8 bars are bad in themselves, they're just a std bar now, it's just that companies don't make 25.4 anymore,so when it comes to retire my current bar, it's either buy 2nd hand, hit up NOS from ebay, or buy a bar and a stem (already done that on 2 bikes already).
    All the gear and no idea.

  22. #522
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    Na, everybody knew quill stems were crap...that and the locknut headsets and threaded forks, it was all bad, having to adjust them, swapping anything...it was all just crap, everyone complained about them, all the time, but what else was there? Nothing, along comes threadless, bingo, solve all the issues with no real down side.
    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
    I brake for stinkbugs

  23. #523
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPunchCholla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    683
    What cracks me up about this conversation is that, except for maybe the quill St (and I'm pretty sure I saw that on Universal Cycles), most things that were to of the line when they were produced for 26 are still available. Maybe not the exact model but a reasonable equivalent.

    A couple of years ago, at the age of 44,I got into downhill and decided to buy a DH bike. I went with a 26 2012 Jedi. World cup fork, cane creak shock. Maxxis tires, code brakes, Stan's wheels and saint drive train.

    I've had no problem upgrading/cross-grading parts. Bought NOS wheels (the same ones Cam Zink rides) for $200. Can still get the same Maxxis tires but switched to Magic Mary's. Got new brakes and a newer shock. Rebuild the fork (which is 7 years old at this point) with no difficulty. Handle bars are 31.8 so that's not an issue, but if you're running an older standard and can't afford the stem to go with it, maybe you should look at your saving plan again.

    Yeah. Bikes cost allot. But given the bike is 6 plus years old, from a boutique brand, I wouldn't expect to be supported forever. And 6 to 7 years has to be 18 to 21 in the automotive world. I have a 16 year old car and I don't expect to be able to get current standards for it.

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

  24. #524
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by IPunchCholla View Post
    Yeah. Bikes cost allot. But given the bike is 6 plus years old, from a boutique brand, I wouldn't expect to be supported forever. And 6 to 7 years has to be 18 to 21 in the automotive world. I have a 16 year old car and I don't expect to be able to get current standards for it.

    Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
    I see what youre saying but I think this attitude towards replacing stuff, generally speaking, is, to a high degree, a product of the industrys intentional planned obsolescence. They WANT us to dump our things and buy new ones.

    On the other hand, we as consumers are not entirely innocent, as a whole.

    I can replace anything on My 1975 Honda cb750 motorcycle (albeit not always OEM) because they garnered a very strong following and a lot of folks still own them and upkeep them instead of tossing them for the latest and greatest. Similarly, and for the same reasons, I can get all the support I need for my 2001 toyota pickup.

    On the other hand, maybe quill stems and 25.4 stems are going extinct because everybody bought into the threadless and 31.8 (whether you think theyre better or not)

    Call me crazy, but I love friction shifting 3x9 drivetrains and i fear for their extinction too, if not enough people buy them.

    For now, though there are only a handful of new 26ers being sold, wheels, tires and compatible suspension options are still plentiful. I think that Whether this remains the case depends to a large degree on whether or not folks all dump their 26ers for 29ers or continue to keep their 26ers and replace the relevant components.

    Having said that, Im trying to offload my 26er mountain bike for the simple reason that I want a hard tail, so maybe Im just feeding the monster too.

  25. #525
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    I distinctly remember when people (lots of them) thought index shifting was bullcrap.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hman0217 View Post
    Call me crazy, but I love friction shifting 3x9 drivetrains and i fear for their extinction too, if not enough people buy them.

    ^See what I mean?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  26. #526
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    ^See what I mean?
    Lest my meaning be misinterpreted, I DON'T think index shifting is crap. Nor do I frown on its introduction. I just happen to like friction shifting, at least on my commuter and touring bikes. Automatic transmission has far surpassed manual transmission in automobiles. Doesn't mean I can't personally prefer stick shifts.

  27. #527
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,992
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    And I'm not saying 31.8 bars are bad in themselves, they're just a std bar now, it's just that companies don't make 25.4 anymore,so when it comes to retire my current bar, it's either buy 2nd hand, hit up NOS from ebay, or buy a bar and a stem (already done that on 2 bikes already).
    I have an older rigid steel SS bike that I still love riding on a regular basis. When new the bike beat the h.ll out of my wrists on rough trails. Changing to a 2.4 front tire (tubeless) + carbon fork helped some but converting from the stock 31.8 bar to 25.4 did far more to improve ride quality. Lack of availability is a concern for me too since I don't plan on ever getting rid of this bike.
    Mole

  28. #528
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    You guys should check out the frame building forum, there's a guy there making wooden bars. Probably could do them in 25.4mm.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  29. #529
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,702
    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
    Yeah sure, you're always going to get retrogrouches for everything, heck I am occasionally (always?) one too...but I also like new tech, always have, one of the thing I like about mtbing.
    I just found in the past/old days/whatever, you had big changes periodically and they were for a reason. eg with the quill stems, they worked fine coming from ye oldie days ("worked" they still were a hassle, but they did the job), but with suspension coming along and people actually swapping forks, threadless made much more sense plus was better...also happening was the swap to oversized steerers, coming about due to suspension as well, more load or whatever...also with the influx of more aluminum frames, 1-1/8 was better than 1 inch...although evolution size would have been more better really but I think it might have been a bit early, not so many susp forks and alu frames or whatever reason.

    So about 1994ish you had a big shift, suspension corrected, oversize, threadless, and that lasted as a major standard for like 15? years and an awful lot of stuff was interchangable.

    Then discs, really became a thing in the late 90's, but from around 99 til say 09 most (at least a whole lot) of bikes could run both (maybe somethng the road bike world could take a hint from), so that was another shift, 2010ish no more rim brakes.

    But since then in the lat 8 years (or there abouts, not being picky about timelines, just a general idea) we've had all sorts of changes that are all over the place
    -31.8 bars
    -35 bars
    -29ers
    -27.5
    -fat
    -plus 27.5
    -plus 29
    -through axles
    -142 rear hubs
    -boost

    and i'm sure there are others, were probably up to super boost or something. But each time it renders old stuff obsolete, where in the older times, they didn't. And yes at times you need to have a total shift in whats going on as tech/designs change that much (eg the threadless/oversize switch, or disc only), but if you actually decide on a standard and do it in reasonable time frames, not such an issue, but make big changes every year, its fcked in the head.
    All the gear and no idea.

  30. #530
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    .....and i'm sure there are others, were probably up to super boost or something. But each time it renders old stuff obsolete

    I guess I just don't see it that way, I've got an old Karate Monkey frame collecting dust in the shed and aside from the 29" wheels and 1 & 1/8 threadless steer tube it's pretty retro. I could buy parts for it and set it up no problem if I wanted but I like my newer bike better.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  31. #531
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,702
    Sorry should have said out of date tech rather than obsolete, if you upgrade bikes every year, or every ten years then you're good to go, but if you want to upgrade you frame every few years, then things will be more interesting if they keep up with all the changes.
    All the gear and no idea.

  32. #532
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    - I look at some of the bikes out there and the prices are just crazy $6-$7k and you're getting a 27 pound bike...

    same here, I have a Kona 100mm double suspension all XT scandium frame from 2010, have a really hard time "upgrading" to newer bikes, because a similar replacement costs 6000$ and its heavier

    I love bigger wheels, slacker head angle, boost spacing... but internal cable routing, dropper seatposts, 1X drivetrains with 400$ cassettes... it seems no one makes old school XC bikes anymore.

    I go to factory demos days and try new bikes, some I would have not been happy at all buying.... RM element is the best and very good, way better than my own 26 no doubt. But too expensive for me at the moment, wish I can some day.

    Still my Kona hei hei 100 is a fantastic ride, I love the range and usability of the 3x9! overall the bike still feels great and fast.

  33. #533
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DavidR8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    68
    Kinda glad I ran across this thread. Im just entering the sport and Im choking at the prices of new bikes. All 27s and 29s of course.

    I think Id rather lay down small bucks for a slightly used 26er. And partly because I wanted to race cruisers after BMX but never did.
    Call me crazy!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  34. #534
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,753
    All of the wheel sizes available for us to choose from and ride upon are great.

    Riding 26" has become quaint, vintage, retro, and trialsy. Fair enough.

    26 is fun and remains a good way to ride with style.

    One positive aspect is that you sit a little lower, and can get under some stuff, especially with a seat dropper, that you can't on a taller set of wheels.

    Another aspect is that since they are smaller, they can be lighter.

    Yeah I suppose there are some great 26" frames to find, buy, build and ride out there.

    Some titanium hardtail frames with disc brake mounts are floating around out there. I'd consider some of these finds to be among the best out there.

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  35. #535
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bridgestone14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,011
    Is that a homegrown?
    Looking for a Medium Scott Scale frame, preferably a 2012 in 26.

  36. #536
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    358
    on the 25.4 handlebars..... I have 620mm wide bars and cant seem to find anything much wider in 25.4......I run lights on my bikes because I am mostly an urban mountain biker and commute to work for more ride time... I ride 26ers because I can keep costs down plus I got my bikes for free or very cheap
    97 specialized rockhopper.- urban beater
    2013 GT aggressor 3.0- urban assault vehicle

  37. #537
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,753
    Just bought and installed a new 710mm wide 6061 aluminum Soma Odin handlebar with 25.4 center. Did my third ride on this today. Very pleased. FWIW



    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  38. #538
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bluegill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    113
    I made the jump to 31.8 to get wider carbon bars. Went from 640mm to 740mm Renthal Fat Carbon Light. Taking them on first trail ride tomorrow AM.

  39. #539
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    16
    Whats a 29er?

  40. #540
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wightweenie26er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by OldBlue950 View Post
    Whats a 29er?

    a large wheel size that is in fashion at the mo. Not better than a 26er.

  41. #541
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,875
    what width you were you on before?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Burns View Post
    Just bought and installed a new 710mm wide 6061 aluminum Soma Odin handlebar with 25.4 center. Did my third ride on this today. Very pleased. FWIW



    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
    breezy shade

  42. #542
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,875
    overall, better is for sure a matter of opinion, based probably more on preference. they are definitely more efficient at rollover of equal sized objects. that's a fact of physics. that's one. I believe there are others.
    FWIW, I ride 26
    Quote Originally Posted by wightweenie26er View Post
    a large wheel size that is in fashion at the mo. Not better than a 26er.
    breezy shade

  43. #543
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,753
    Quote Originally Posted by nhodge View Post
    what width you were you on before?
    I threw the Odin 25.4 bar out there because it is 25.4 and 710mm.

    This was installed on a 29er actually, which I recently acquired, and I needed to adjust the cockpit to my liking, and in doing so I actually made a retrospec to a Syncros steel stem with a 25.4 clamp. The bar was chosen to match the stem, and the stem was chosen to match the bike.

    29er bikes are very nice.

    26er bikes are in my stable and are ridden half of the time.

    Bar widths are anywhere from 650 to 720 on the mountain bikes.

    26" bikes are extremely relevant IMHO. Going from one bike to another ensures an outstanding experience on each ride when the terrain is the regular terrain I ride over and over.

    The 26" bike possesses many endearing properties. Others have detailed these properties on this forum.

    Savor the eloquent grammar of the 26" ride. 26" punctuates each ride with the exclamation "follow me!". The other wheel sizes followed.



    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  44. #544
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,191
    Ideal wheel size could also be a function of leg length, and the type of riding you do.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  45. #545
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,482
    Quote Originally Posted by OldBlue950 View Post
    Whats a 29er?
    Quote Originally Posted by wightweenie26er View Post
    a large wheel size that is in fashion at the mo. Not better than a 26er.
    As the author of this thread and a current enthusiast and regular rider of my 26" hardtail, I believe I deserve I little bit of grace for what I'm about to say.

    My Stache is basically the modern 29+ equivalent to my 26'er. Both similar styles of bikes in that they're both All Mountain Hardtails. Both similar head angles, builds, and fork travel...

    ...my Stache is better at absolutely everything than my 26'er. Climbing, descending, level winding through the woods, monster trucking, wheelie dropping...etc...

    I still love to ride my 26'er and do it on a regular basis though.
    26? What's the point??!!-20170609_222658.jpg
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-img_20170528_012930.jpg  


  46. #546
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,753
    Quote Originally Posted by bridgestone14 View Post
    Is that a homegrown?
    It's a 26" 853 steel Airborne track end single speed. Sorry, it's a bad photo for the details. I'm not sure of the vintage. Believe it's from around 2000. It has V brakes.


    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  47. #547
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    As the author of this thread and a current enthusiast and regular rider of my 26" hardtail, I believe I deserve I little bit of grace for what I'm about to say.

    My Stache is basically the modern 29+ equivalent to my 26'er. Both similar styles of bikes in that they're both All Mountain Hardtails. Both similar head angles, builds, and fork travel...

    ...my Stache is better at absolutely everything than my 26'er. Climbing, descending, level winding through the woods, monster trucking, wheelie dropping...etc...

    I still love to ride my 26'er and do it on a regular basis though.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20170609_222658.jpg 
Views:	41 
Size:	110.6 KB 
ID:	1214898
    I hear you. I have a surly krampus that I absolutely love for its go-anywhere attitude. Its simply the diminishing availability of 26ers thats disconcerting.

    For me, I want to start bikepacking and am not a terribly tall fellow, meaning 29er tires dont give me much room above the tires for seat and bar bags. My LHT is a 26er but itd be nice to get mtb geometry for bikepacking.

    luckily, there are still a few options left but it takes us buying them to ensure their survival.

  48. #548
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    7
    I broke my derailleur cable on my Enduro 29 (2017) and "had to take" my old stumpjumper evo 26" the weekend.
    And wow! had forgotten how fun that bike was! It just so fun to handle in tight corners and technical descends, so easy to lift and throw the bike around. With the Enduro you just roll with the bike.

    So now I looking into if I can afford to upgrade the fork and start using it on trail riding and keep the Enduro fr Downhill.

  49. #549
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    975
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    As the author of this thread and a current enthusiast and regular rider of my 26" hardtail, I believe I deserve I little bit of grace for what I'm about to say.

    My Stache is basically the modern 29+ equivalent to my 26'er. Both similar styles of bikes in that they're both All Mountain Hardtails. Both similar head angles, builds, and fork travel...

    ...my Stache is better at absolutely everything than my 26'er. Climbing, descending, level winding through the woods, monster trucking, wheelie dropping...etc...

    I still love to ride my 26'er and do it on a regular basis though.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20170609_222658.jpg 
Views:	41 
Size:	110.6 KB 
ID:	1214898
    I have a Stache 7 as well but also ride my Bontrager Race Lite from time-to-time, and sometimes my OS Blackbuck 29er SS. Although I have had my share of Aluminum and titanium framed bikes I still like steel rigid and hardtail bikes best and the 26" versions will always have a place in my garage. The Stache is comfortable and easy to ride, climbs great, absorbs a lot of shock and handles relatively well. The downside is that even with a tubeless set-up its heavy at 29lbs. Overall I agree with most of what you are saying regarding the benefits of 29+, and 29 and 27.5 for that matter. On tight trails though, I prefer the 26" Bontrager hands-down over the Stache though as it is just a more agile and fun bike for me to ride. Different strokes for different folks though, and not saying my opinion matters but it is my perspective on the same comparison regarding the Stache and thought I would share. Right now I have my Stache up for sale, but not so I can buy some other new higher tech bike with the latest gadgets. I simply haven't enjoyed riding the Stache like I have other bikes. Conversely my Bontrager Race Lite would be much more difficult for me to part with.

  50. #550
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    673
    Sure, 26-inch wheel bikes are fun to ride. So are 27.5 and 29-inch wheel bikes. The 26-er is in no way better than it's newer, larger-wheeled cousins, though most of the difference is due to improved frame geometry on the newer bikes. If you have a 26-er that you enjoy, then great. Go out and ride it and have fun. Just don't pretend that it is a better bike.

  51. #551
    Special Ed
    Reputation: Neuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Skooks View Post
    The 26-er is in no way better than it's newer, larger-wheeled cousins, though most of the difference is due to improved frame geometry on the newer bikes. Just don't pretend that it is a better bike.
    Professional downhill mountain bikers still use 26" for a reason. They will go over anything bigger or faster than you would or could.
    'Things you own...begin owning you.'

  52. #552
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: sXeXBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Neuner View Post
    Professional downhill mountain bikers still use 26" for a reason. They will go over anything bigger or faster than you would or could.
    yeah...but that is because they are professional...

    a professional mountain biker would ride my 29+ Krampus bigger and faster than me, but not because of the bike....because they are professional.

    and I am not against 26ers...I still ride mine.
    "It's about having pointless fun in the woods...." - Walt
    '15 Surly Krampus
    '87 Mongoose Californian Pro
    LET IT SNOW!!!

  53. #553
    Special Ed
    Reputation: Neuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by sXeXBMXer View Post
    yeah...but that is because they are professional...

    a professional mountain biker would ride my 29+ Krampus bigger and faster than me, but not because of the bike....because they are professional.

    and I am not against 26ers...I still ride mine.
    If you're not Skooks then why did you care what I wrote to him/her? You have a double profile?

    By the way, professionals are who they are for a reason. They choose the best gear for what they do because they are pushing the limits. Sure they can go fast in a 29er, but since it's not the best, they don't.

    Since I'm addressing you, and not Skooks, you may respond...
    'Things you own...begin owning you.'

  54. #554
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: sXeXBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Neuner View Post
    If you're not Skooks then why did you care what I wrote to him/her? You have a double profile?

    By the way, professionals are who they are for a reason. They choose the best gear for what they do because they are pushing the limits. Sure they can go fast in a 29er, but since it's not the best, they don't.

    Since I'm addressing you, and not Skooks, you may respond...
    oh...I may respond.

    Since this is a public forum, people tend to make comments on things in the threads when they want. If you wanted the conversation between you and Skooks to be private, you should PM him. I see by your post count that you are new. You should get used to people here who are going to respond to your posts even if they are not directly addressed to them. It happens a lot....

    ...but, I also see that by your join date you are old...did you forget theways of the forums?

    BTW, if that is your jeep in your avatar, I am jealous...pretty sweet!!
    "It's about having pointless fun in the woods...." - Walt
    '15 Surly Krampus
    '87 Mongoose Californian Pro
    LET IT SNOW!!!

  55. #555
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Professional downhill riders still use 26" wheels?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  56. #556
    Special Ed
    Reputation: Neuner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by sXeXBMXer View Post
    oh...I may respond.

    Since this is a public forum, people tend to make comments on things in the threads when they want. If you wanted the conversation between you and Skooks to be private, you should PM him. I see by your post count that you are new. You should get used to people here who are going to respond to your posts even if they are not directly addressed to them. It happens a lot....

    BTW, if that is your jeep in your avatar, I am jealous...pretty sweet!!
    Nope, not new and not new to forums. No, I don't see a whole lot of others butting in on the many other forums that I belong to with exception for Pirate4x4. That's only because they/we are a bunch of Aholes and know it This one is filled more with a lot of unnecessarily cocky young guys. Older members smart enough to use their old 26ers so one of the reasons I like this section of this forum. At least the ones on Pirate4x4 know what they are doing and not sold on a bunch of marketing BS.

    Thanks - '85 CJ7 with 4.0 and T177 conversion. 4.5"RE lift. Currently wrapping up a rebuild of the T177. Needing to rebuild front dif and dropping in of Aussie Locker, hoping for a shackle reversal soon, needing to drop the tank, and repaint the exterior. Don't be too jealous...
    'Things you own...begin owning you.'

  57. #557
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    9
    I bought my 26er HT because it was cheaper than the other options with bigger wheels. And I suck at trail riding, decent road bike rider - but slow and sucky off road. That is pretty much the honest answer for me.

    I went through a thing with the road bikes when I started riding. Bought an older inexpensive (ish) bike (aluminum and full 105 used but loved) and rode rode rode. Got in with a bike shop and got sucked in to needing the next new awesome stuff with each new bike- carbon this and that and better components. Spent a lot of money and not sure it really "upgraded" that much.

    Sure it was little lighter, rolled a little easier, looked massively better. But I don't race really - just an occasional for fun so what difference did it really make. I like to tinker and spin wrenches though so the idea of upgrading parts is fun.

    So that's what I did. Bought a used and no so loved bike and and upgrading it and loving on it a little bit. And just riding as much as I can to improve my skills and enjoy myself. It hasn't been the cheapest way to go in the long run I am sure but it has been fun and my technical skill is still by far the limiting factor.

  58. #558
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    673
    Quote Originally Posted by Neuner View Post
    Professional downhill mountain bikers still use 26" for a reason. They will go over anything bigger or faster than you would or could.
    Really? Which pro DH rider has got on the podium on a 26-er in the last 3 years? Most pro riders switched to 27.5 around 2015, and some race 29ers now. Check out this link:

    https://www.singletracks.com/blog/mt...ace-results/7/

    You wont find 26ers on this list.

    And yes, of course pro DH racers are faster than me. That has nothing to do with wheel size.

  59. #559
    C-H
    C-H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    167
    What I really don't get is the 27.5" size.

    It's like the manufacturers killed 26" and created 27.5" just to be able to sell/start over on a market flooded with good cheap 26" parts.

    I've moved on to 29" since a few months just because my old bike (Rocky Mountain Element) is a late 90's/early-mid 00' build and it was time for something new.

  60. #560
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    673
    Quote Originally Posted by C-H View Post
    What I really don't get is the 27.5" size.

    It's like the manufacturers killed 26" and created 27.5" just to be able to sell/start over on a market flooded with good cheap 26" parts.

    I've moved on to 29" since a few months just because my old bike (Rocky Mountain Element) is a late 90's/early-mid 00' build and it was time for something new.
    27.5 may not be the wheel size for you, but for a lot of people it works very well. I am short and I ride steep, technical trails with a lot of tight corners. The 27.5 wheel is perfect for me. I am not saying that 29ers are no good, and I will likely own one someday, but right now I am really enjoying the smaller wheels

  61. #561
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    673
    Quote Originally Posted by Skooks View Post
    Really? Which pro DH rider has got on the podium on a 26-er in the last 3 years? Most pro riders switched to 27.5 around 2015, and some race 29ers now. Check out this link:

    https://www.singletracks.com/blog/mt...ace-results/7/

    You wont find 26ers on this list.

    And yes, of course pro DH racers are faster than me. That has nothing to do with wheel size.
    As expected, no response from Neuner.

  62. #562
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,753
    Quote Originally Posted by C-H View Post
    What I really don't get is the 27.5" size.

    It's like the manufacturers killed 26" and created 27.5" just to be able to sell/start over on a market flooded with good cheap 26" parts.

    I've moved on to 29" since a few months just because my old bike (Rocky Mountain Element) is a late 90's/early-mid 00' build and it was time for something new.
    26, 27.5, 29. And what about boost 148?

    I've never thought these kinds of changes come about primarily to force people to buy more equipment. But I agree that it does drive more sales.

    As one who rides them all, (except 29+ so far), 26 is still a good format. Going from 29 one day, and 26 the next, or vice versa, even on the same trails, is fine.

    Okay, maybe if it's all about average speed, then 27.5 is faster, and 29 is fastest.

    Here's something I think is a benefit : 27+/29 bikes. Some bikes can be run as 27+ bikes and 29ers with just a wheel change. Each tire size changes the handling.

    Yeah, more tires to sell and buy and wear out.

    My wife rides X-small frames. She has a 29" X-small hardtail that rolls and fits.

    Yeah, they sell more tires.

    Dddddddddddddd3dx,* a lot of 26" tires that need to be used m4



    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  63. #563
    C-H
    C-H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by Skooks View Post
    27.5 may not be the wheel size for you, but for a lot of people it works very well. I am short and I ride steep, technical trails with a lot of tight corners. The 27.5 wheel is perfect for me. I am not saying that 29ers are no good, and I will likely own one someday, but right now I am really enjoying the smaller wheels
    I was just wondering why 27.5 was created when 26 exists? I never ridden 27.5 but I can barely see the difference between 26 and 27.5.

  64. #564
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,340
    Quote Originally Posted by C-H View Post
    I was just wondering why 27.5 was created when 26 exists? I never ridden 27.5 but I can barely see the difference between 26 and 27.5.
    There's a long history that goes back at least to Tom Ritchey in the 1970s: The renaissance of the 650B wheel .

    Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if the plus-sizing thing had happened first. Ritchey and others in the early days were working with 1.75" tires, which are way small in diameter on 26er rims. Get up to 2.6" and wider though, and diameter begins to become reasonable.

  65. #565
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,536
    Quote Originally Posted by C-H View Post
    I was just wondering why 27.5 was created when 26 exists?
    27.5 - AKA 650b - has existed for a very long time.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  66. #566
    C-H
    C-H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    27.5 - AKA 650b - has existed for a very long time.
    Well yes, I know.... but you DO get what I mean right?
    From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.

    29-er is a different story. It is way different from 26.

  67. #567
    C-H
    C-H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by JonathanGennick View Post
    There's a long history that goes back at least to Tom Ritchey in the 1970s: The renaissance of the 650B wheel .

    Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if the plus-sizing thing had happened first. Ritchey and others in the early days were working with 1.75" tires, which are way small in diameter on 26er rims. Get up to 2.6" and wider though, and diameter begins to become reasonable.
    Thx. That's a great read.

  68. #568
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,536
    Quote Originally Posted by C-H View Post
    Well yes, I know.... but you DO get what I mean right?
    From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.

    29-er is a different story. It is way different from 26.
    The difference is not as extreme as going to 29er, but it is different. Small changes make a difference. Not a huge improvement, but an improvement, IMO.

    I don't really buy the industry conspiracy arguments I often see. Most companies rejected the idea, until it became apparent that very soon they would not be selling many bikes if they did not get on the 650b train. That was them simply responding to the market. Ask Dave Turner (Turner Bikes). for years, the 26" 5-Spot was his best selling bike. But the moment he released the Burner (nearly identical to the 5-Spot, but with 27.5 wheels) it was all he could do to GIVE 5-Spots away. Worked for me, as that is the only reason I could ever afford a 5-Spot. Which I still ride as my main MTB.

    There was never anything magic about 26" or 29". They were just common wheel sizes at the time they were pressed into service for mtb use. One could argue that 650b is the first time a wheel size was chosen strictly on its merits, rather than because it was already common as dirt (as with 26 and 29).
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  69. #569
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,340
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    I don't really buy the industry conspiracy arguments I often see. Most companies rejected the idea, until it became apparent that very soon they would not be selling many bikes if they did not get on the 650b train. That was them simply responding to the market.
    I agree. My memory matches yours. No bicycle brand wants to be stuck with container loads of inventory that won't sell. The big shift came about because "nobody ever got fired for spec'ing 650b".
    Last edited by JonathanGennick; 5 Days Ago at 05:59 AM. Reason: closed a bracket

  70. #570
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wightweenie26er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    55
    My view on this subject is 'Choice' If i want to buy a 29 then fine, a 650 fine or the 26er. then i can. Talk of killing off one or the other is mad. I remember they said that about analogue watches when the digital came out. Now who is still king? If you pay big money you buy a round face with hands. The cheap give away watches are the digitals. Lucky some companies still make high end 26er kit. Long live Extralite. As i'm happy to ride a 26er. And maybe people will come back after seeing this whole 29er thing as a marketing ploy to sell bikes.

  71. #571
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,361
    Quote Originally Posted by C-H View Post
    From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.
    Yep ^^^
    exactly
    They want to make you believe that you HAVE to buy this new bike/wheels/tyres.
    That how they make their money.

    Here's a photo of my main MTB and My commuter
    The 650 has 1,75 slick the 26 has 2,2 knobby , not a world of difference.
    Same diameter.

    Now when someone tells me that 650 rolls a lot better over obstacles than 26, I kinda find that funny

    I'm not talking 700 wheels but 650.


    26? What's the point??!!-dscn2038.jpg
    Last edited by fokof; 1 Day Ago at 06:55 PM.
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  72. #572
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    3,571
    Quote Originally Posted by wightweenie26er View Post
    My view on this subject is 'Choice' If i want to buy a 29 then fine, a 650 fine or the 26er. then i can. Talk of killing off one or the other is mad. I remember they said that about analogue watches when the digital came out. Now who is still king? If you pay big money you buy a round face with hands. The cheap give away watches are the digitals. Lucky some companies still make high end 26er kit. Long live Extralite. As i'm happy to ride a 26er. And maybe people will come back after seeing this whole 29er thing as a marketing ploy to sell bikes.
    i beg to differ on the watch thing:

    https://www.timepiece.com/casio-g-sh...yABEgKWpPD_BwE

  73. #573
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,340
    Quote Originally Posted by fokof View Post
    Here's a photo of my main MTB and My commuter
    The 650 has 1,75 slick the 26 has 2,2 knobby , not a world of difference.
    That's why I wonder whether 650b would have taken over so fast had the plus-size trend occurred first. We can't redo history to find out though.

  74. #574
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by wightweenie26er View Post
    I remember they said that about analogue watches when the digital came out. Now who is still king?



    People still wear watches?
    I brake for stinkbugs

  75. #575
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    63
    Interesting comments... ultimately the big wheel revolution was an industry conspiracy to disrupt the way things were, and make money on it. The bicycle industry is much more consolidated now than they have ever been, and all these "big fish" can lean on others to make things happen. The rest of the smaller players have to go with the flow. To me the unsettling part of what is going on is that there is no one out there who would be willing to build 26ers with "modern" geometry, that would allow folks to swap their old bike components onto the new frame and have a "modern" bike (this is an oversimplification). I'm concerned about the industry's willingness to abandon older technology that not only works - but works well, only to support the new thing. The way they are leaning on racers in the road cycling to use disc brakes is a good example of what I'm talking about here. Discs on a road bike won't make you go faster, but they sure will make servicing your bike a lot harder, and more expensive...

    I admit that I'm not an early adopter, and I loved the 8 speed because it worked great, but then switched to 9 speed and that was fine, though the chain would break more often, then came 11 speed and 2x and 1x and the importance of ratios faded as the range became king... I'm still on my 27 gears and completely happy. I don't even know why people switch to 1x or 2x, front derailleur gets set up once, and that's it - at least on my bikes... my problems will begin as all the parts I'm using start wearing out to the point of having to be replaced - but I've got 7 bikes at least and bunch of spares - so I think I'm set.

  76. #576
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    10,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    The way they are leaning on racers in the road cycling to use disc brakes is a good example of what I'm talking about here. Discs on a road bike won't make you go faster, but they sure will make servicing your bike a lot harder, and more expensive...


    Tests have shown that disc brakes can improve downhill times, especially in foul weather. Aside from that they're just better, and ime require very little service.

    There are still lots of frame builders who will make exactly what you want for a reasonable price.
    I brake for stinkbugs

  77. #577
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,034
    Quote Originally Posted by C-H View Post
    Well yes, I know.... but you DO get what I mean right?
    From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.

    29-er is a different story. It is way different from 26.
    There's objective history and then we each have our own perspective. What follows is my perspective.

    The 26" wheel dominated for about three decades. Fisher got behind the 29" wheel and early this century it was like popping a zit -- once it blew, it went all over. Riders, especially taller riders, appreciated a wheel size that offers genuine rollover improvement. And it does.

    But it's not as easy to build a small frame around a bigger wheel. Especially full suspension frames.

    I believe (aka my perspective) the bicycle industry was eager to embrace the 27.5" wheel in part because it solved production problems. The 27.5" wheel allowed bike mfgrs to make long travel frames in small & XS sizes. That and yeah, every time "standards" change, demanding consumers gotta buy new shite. Yet another "new" wheel size? Terrific -- more sales.

    But this was the order -- 26 then 29 then 27.5. It wasn't progressive 26-27.5-29. After small, then big, the industry claimed the mid-size wheel was kinda like Goldilocks. Except it's not like Goldilocks because taller folks are genuinely served better by the largest wheel of the three. For everybody else, there's the 27.5" wheel. 26" is for kids and kid-sized adults.

    Now don't shake your finger at me, I'm not out to intentionally offend anyone. This is simply my opinion. I told you from the beginning you'd get my perspective and that's what you got.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  78. #578
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    Interesting comments... ultimately the big wheel revolution was an industry conspiracy to disrupt the way things were, and make money on it.
    That's not really a fair characterization. Gary Fisher pushed 29ers because like any other brand he was looking for product differentiation and to sell bicycles. I'm sure it helped that he's a tall guy and personally believed in the larger wheel size. Much of the bike tech I enjoy today derives from that sort of vision and drive.

    To me the unsettling part of what is going on is that there is no one out there who would be willing to build 26ers with "modern" geometry
    Do you want to be stuck with a few container loads of bicycles or frames that won't sell? Do you want to put thousands of dollars of _your_ money on the line to pay for a production run of frames? I like 26er options too, and just built two 26er wheelsets, but I'm not sure that I'd bet my retirement fund on a container load of frames.

  79. #579
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    Discs on a road bike won't make you go faster
    A wise man once said, "If I can STOP faster, then I can GO faster!"
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  80. #580
    Just A Mountain Biker.
    Reputation: blaklabl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,242
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    26" is for kids and kid-sized adults.
    I know its your perspective/opinion, but that's not really fair. I'm not kid-sized at 5'8", and 26" wheels are still my preference. Not because I am a luddite, or have my head in the sand, or am throwing some tantrum no one will ever see. I've sold every 29"er I've ever had, and in fact just sold the 27.5" bike I had not because of the wheel size but because it offered me nothing I didn't already have.

    Sure, eventually 26" parts will dwindle even further, and to get what I really like in a frame I will most likely have to get a 27.5" compatible custom built frame - but until them I am content with the wheel size I prefer.

    But to say 26 is only good for kids and kid-sized adults, that's a little shitty.
    MTBR: Your dad's online mountain bike forum.



  81. #581
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,536
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    Interesting comments... ultimately the big wheel revolution was an industry conspiracy to disrupt the way things were, and make money on it.
    Hmmm, I don't think so. I think the less you know or remember about the introduction and adoption of 29" wheels, the more appealing a conspiracy theory is. But in this case it just does not jive with the history of it. The big companies in fact took a long time to adopt the platform. In the beginning it was basically just Gary Fisher, the allways-quietly-ahead-of-the-curve Surly, and a few start up brands like Niner. If I recall correctly, even though Trek owned Gary Fisher Bikes at the time, it took a little while for them to have 29ers in the "Trek" lineup. Specialized would have nothing to do with 29ers until they had no choice, and most of the other big companies were very late to the party as well.

    The bicycle industry is much more consolidated now than they have ever been, and all these "big fish" can lean on others to make things happen.
    Really? How do you figure. There are a LOT of new bike companies that have popped up in the past 20 years, particularly in the MTB market.
    The rest of the smaller players have to go with the flow.
    But in the case of wheel size it started with smaller companies, not the bigger ones.

    To me the unsettling part of what is going on is that there is no one out there who would be willing to build 26ers with "modern" geometry, that would allow folks to swap their old bike components onto the new frame and have a "modern" bike (this is an oversimplification).
    Hey, I totally feel your pain on that. For the past 20 years I have always been able to buy new frames, fork, and tires when something interesting came along without needing a whole new bike. Now the best I can do is going used and buying whatever was cutting edge in 2013.

    But that is not a reason for manufacturers to keep producing stuff few people will buy.

    I'm concerned about the industry's willingness to abandon older technology that not only works - but works well, only to support the new thing.
    By that rationale, we would all still be stuck using canti brakes.

    Just to be clear, I DO think that there are instances where a large companies have used their position to force the adoption of something new that was not an improvement (see my sig). But I don' think wheel size is one of them.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  82. #582
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,034
    Quote Originally Posted by blaklabl View Post
    I know its your perspective/opinion, but that's not really fair. I'm not kid-sized at 5'8", and 26" wheels are still my preference. Not because I am a luddite, or have my head in the sand, or am throwing some tantrum no one will ever see. I've sold every 29"er I've ever had, and in fact just sold the 27.5" bike I had not because of the wheel size but because it offered me nothing I didn't already have.

    Sure, eventually 26" parts will dwindle even further, and to get what I really like in a frame I will most likely have to get a 27.5" compatible custom built frame - but until them I am content with the wheel size I prefer.

    But to say 26 is only good for kids and kid-sized adults, that's a little shitty.
    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.* And yeah, I'll project the same opinion onto the remainder of the off-road riding world regardless of how myopic doing so may be. My opinion is based on my experience and the reason I feel the way I do. I sincerely believe that anyone who'll fit on larger wheels will be better served by them.

    But everyone -- including you & me -- is entitled to their own opinion and I'm not simply being patronizing when I say it's refreshing to find someone who feels as you do, blaklabl. I may disagree but I think the diversity is terrific. I rode 26" wheels for 30 years and enjoyed every mountain bike I ever owned with that wheelsize. Right up until something dramatically better came along.

    Bikes with proper wheelbases (ie: long) are another boon to someone my height (6'2"). Given my center of gravity disadvantage, I need all the help I can get. Wheels that roll over things better plus a frame that helps keep me between the axles -- both really help.

    Meanwhile run what ya brung and hold your head high, blaklabl. We each have to make our own way.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  83. #583
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Hmmm, I don't think so. I think the less you know or remember about the introduction and adoption of 29" wheels, the more appealing a conspiracy theory is. But in this case it just does not jive with the history of it. The big companies in fact took a long time to adopt the platform. In the beginning it was basically just Gary Fisher, the allways-quietly-ahead-of-the-curve Surly, and a few start up brands like Niner. If I recall correctly, even though Trek owned Gary Fisher Bikes at the time, it took a little while for them to have 29ers in the "Trek" lineup. Specialized would have nothing to do with 29ers until they had no choice, and most of the other big companies were very late to the party as well.



    Really? How do you figure. There are a LOT of new bike companies that have popped up in the past 20 years, particularly in the MTB market.

    But in the case of wheel size it started with smaller companies, not the bigger ones.



    Hey, I totally feel your pain on that. For the past 20 years I have always been able to buy new frames, fork, and tires when something interesting came along without needing a whole new bike. Now the best I can do is going used and buying whatever was cutting edge in 2013.

    But that is not a reason for manufacturers to keep producing stuff few people will buy.



    By that rationale, we would all still be stuck using canti brakes.

    Just to be clear, I DO think that there are instances where a large companies have used their position to force the adoption of something new that was not an improvement (see my sig). But I don' think wheel size is one of them.
    whew, a long thread! Companies can try and change standards for profit or real improvements but if we dont buy it, it dies, usually quickly. Many examples of this in all areas. Ford tried to come up with a new wheel/tire standard with a tire company. They put it on some cars but it failed badly leaving some owners to buy new wheels some years later. I must say the 29 works much better than the 26 which I rode since 1988. My most serious injury came when I was on a 10% grade going around a hairpin when I encountered a huge root that stopped my bike cold. I impaled myself on a small broken tree and took almost 1 year to be able to walk without pain. I now go over that root with the 29 and my gearing now with a 42 out back together makes that root melt away. So yes, there have been soooooo many improvements in this sport that makes it safer and more fun. It may cause us to give away the old stuff and buy new to take advantage of these improvements. I am moving to 12 speed when it comes in Di2. Costly but awesome.

  84. #584
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    The difference is not as extreme as going to 29er, but it is different. Small changes make a difference. Not a huge improvement, but an improvement, IMO.

    I don't really buy the industry conspiracy arguments I often see. Most companies rejected the idea, until it became apparent that very soon they would not be selling many bikes if they did not get on the 650b train. That was them simply responding to the market. Ask Dave Turner (Turner Bikes). for years, the 26" 5-Spot was his best selling bike. But the moment he released the Burner (nearly identical to the 5-Spot, but with 27.5 wheels) it was all he could do to GIVE 5-Spots away. Worked for me, as that is the only reason I could ever afford a 5-Spot. Which I still ride as my main MTB.

    There was never anything magic about 26" or 29". They were just common wheel sizes at the time they were pressed into service for mtb use. One could argue that 650b is the first time a wheel size was chosen strictly on its merits, rather than because it was already common as dirt (as with 26 and 29).
    650b came to us via happenstance just like 26" and 29". 650b size predates the sport of MTB. It did not come from R&D to create a dedicated MTB size. It was an off the shelf size people easily fit in their 26"ers. The industry dialed everything in around 650b just like we did with the other two preexisting sizes. Had beach cruisers used 650b nothing would be different about the sport. Someone would have experimented with 26" wheels in their 650b's and raved about how they pumped and jumped better. The industry would have designed around 26 and we would be exactly where we are now with people talking about how 650b was better and the industry screwed us.

  85. #585
    C-H
    C-H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by fokof View Post
    Yep ^^^
    exactly
    They want to make you believe that you HAVE to buy this new bike/wheels/tyres.
    That how they make their money.

    Here's a photo of my main MTB and My commuter
    The 650 has 1,75 slick the 26 has 2,2 knobby , not a world of difference.

    Now when someone tells me that 650 rolls a lot better over obstacles than 26, I kinda find that funny

    I'm not talking 700 wheels but 650.


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSCN2038.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	154.9 KB 
ID:	1224842
    Thx. That's my point here.
    I bet nobody can actually feel a difference. Going 27.5 and silently killing 26 is a great way of making money. Some riders just can't get comfortable on a 29 and would go 26 but hey..... ohhhh if he can ride 26 then we can sell a 27.5 instead.

  86. #586
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    27
    Mass production and standardization of parts - the same thing we (myself included) lament - allow us AMAZING choices as consumers. those goods cost MUCH less than hand-made custom products. But the custom products are still there if you we want to pay the old prices.

    The same is true of bikes. There are a number of reputable frame builders that will bang you out any 20, 24, 26, 27.5, 29, 32, 36, etc... frame you could ask for. If youre willing to pay

    So are we being cheated? Or is the consumer luxury we once had simply giving way to something else?

    Are bike companies evil? Well technically one is but mostly theyre trying to survive in an industry with tight margins. As a manufacturer I know the push/pull between what youd love to do and what you have to do to make it.

    Ive been buying and selling used for the past two years to get an idea what I want most (dragonslayer arrives Monday) because I am honestly often torn between quick and clickable and monster rollover (ranging in bikes Ive owned from a stumpy 26er to a surly Krampus 29+) and hopefully there will be a mainstream option that works for me when I hone in on a winning geo. But if not, then its custom-made if I can afford it

    Wheelsets arent going anywhere with major cities getting massive 26er fleets for their bike shares because theyre so much stronger.

  87. #587
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,536
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    650b came to us via happenstance just like 26" and 29". 650b size predates the sport of MTB. It did not come from R&D to create a dedicated MTB size. It was an off the shelf size people easily fit in their 26"ers. The industry dialed everything in around 650b just like we did with the other two preexisting sizes. Had beach cruisers used 650b nothing would be different about the sport. Someone would have experimented with 26" wheels in their 650b's and raved about how they pumped and jumped better. The industry would have designed around 26 and we would be exactly where we are now with people talking about how 650b was better and the industry screwed us.
    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.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  88. #588
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,340
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    And no, 650b did not first come from people stuffing 650b tires in their 26.
    Quite a few of the early adopters in fact did just that. Kirk Pacenty kicked things off by funding a run of tires. There were already a few rim choices in the needed size. There were numerous early-adopter conversions of 26r bikes.

    There's actually another 650 size -- either 650a or c, I forget -- that would have been a better midpoint, but that wasn't chosen because rims in that size were not available, so b it was.

  89. #589
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Pedalon2018 View Post
    I must say the 29 works much better than the 26 which I rode since 1988.
    I'm sure that would hold true for just about ANY modern bike of any wheel size.
    Or anything from the early 90's on up for that matter.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  90. #590
    C-H
    C-H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    167
    The case for 'choice' and 'standardization of parts' argument would be valid if 26-er equipment was still made on a large scale, which it isn't....

    The question of Boost 148 came up as a reply earlier and there is something to say about that too.

    It is true that a wider hub would give a laterally stronger wheel. On paper it would also result in a very slightly less stiff wheel in the vertical direction.
    It would also allow for a wider tire.

    Now, Boost 148 on a 29" wheel gives about the same spoke angle as 142 spacing on a 26" wheel so it makes sense in terms of keeping the same possibility of stiffness. Increase in tire clearance is barely noticeable.

    If we talk SuperBoost at 153 (?) then the gain is bigger in terms of tire clearance. The spoke angle would only increase by 0.5-0.7 deg or so.

    This video sheds some light on bike spec evolution.


  91. #591
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,096
    omg, I'd forgotten about that video. That's def how it happened.

    Ride what you like, what ya' brung, what you can afford, what ma gave ya'... roll with it and get movin.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  92. #592
    tire to rim ratio tester
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Emax View Post
    The way they are leaning on racers in the road cycling to use disc brakes is a good example of what I'm talking about here. Discs on a road bike won't make you go faster, but they sure will make servicing your bike a lot harder, and more expensive...


    Well it first depends on if the bike frame can handle disk calipers or not. I'm not a big fan of those conversion kits, never tried one but they have very mixed reviews online.

    If a bike frame is disc compatible, it's not expensive OR hard to put them on. I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground mechanic-wise and I'm able to put on pre-bled calipers in 10 minutes. Rotor in 3 minutes. They are as cheap as $50/front-back pair, and that's hydraulic. Most of the time it's zero service until the pads wear out, then you spend $10-20 and it takes about 3-5 minutes to take out the pin, slide in the pads, and put the pin in again.

    I don't mind different opinions and controversy but hydraulic brakes are relatively cheap, very easy to install/maintain, and are clearly superior to rim brakes. This should not even be an argument.
    Coffee, Ted?
    Ted's from a dysfunctional family.
    Oh...so no coffee...
    ---Samuel L. Jackson, Loaded Weapon I

  93. #593
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cbr6fs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    157
    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.* And yeah, I'll project the same opinion onto the remainder of the off-road riding world regardless of how myopic doing so may be. My opinion is based on my experience and the reason I feel the way I do. I sincerely believe that anyone who'll fit on larger wheels will be better served by them.

    But everyone -- including you & me -- is entitled to their own opinion and I'm not simply being patronizing when I say it's refreshing to find someone who feels as you do, blaklabl. I may disagree but I think the diversity is terrific. I rode 26" wheels for 30 years and enjoyed every mountain bike I ever owned with that wheelsize. Right up until something dramatically better came along.

    Bikes with proper wheelbases (ie: long) are another boon to someone my height (6'2"). Given my center of gravity disadvantage, I need all the help I can get. Wheels that roll over things better plus a frame that helps keep me between the axles -- both really help.

    Meanwhile run what ya brung and hold your head high, blaklabl. We each have to make our own way.
    =sParty
    Having an opinion based upon experience is not measurable though, there is just no data to suggest a 26" is "drastically inferior to larger diameter wheels"

    Some 27.5" tyres have the same or even smaller circumference than some 26" tyres
    So any "opinion" about 27.5" being noticeably better at anything than a 26" bike isn't really worth anything

    Even comparing 29" bikes to 26" bikes is pointless

    How many 26" bikes have the same geometry than 29" bikes?
    I can't think of any highly rated built within the last year that has 26" wheels

    The only real test is to fit 26" wheels to a modern 29" bike
    You have the same geometry, same groupset, so it's a fair comparison

    We have done this, not one of the 6 riders that tried it preferred the 29"wheels
    On the single track terrain we tested it on, every single rider preferred the quicker response when peddling and the sharper control on handling of the 26"

    The times didn't offer and conclusive proof
    All said the 26" wheels felt faster, some where faster with the 26" wheels, others were faster with the 29" wheels

    This is the problem
    People buy stuff then post how it's dramatically or drastically better, it's eases their mind in their choices physiologically
    The reality is that their opinions are not based on facts and their not subjective, as they're not comparing like to like

    As we're all adults it's really everyone's choice what they spend their hard earned on
    If i see a mate that's happy with his new bike, i'm really happy for him

    But to push the line that something that's not been measured or tested comparatively is "drastically inferior" is just wrong and not based on any facts what-so-ever

    If you prefer a 29er, good on ya, i think it's great that you've found something you're happy with.
    But you don't need to justify that choice by by using completely unsubstantiated opinions
    1994 Fully Rigid Diamond Back Axis TT
    2009 Trek Fuel Ex 7

  94. #594
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OneTrustMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    239
    Are there any "non super expensive" options for 26 inch front wheels in 110x15mm?

    Seriously there are shit tons of 27er and 29er available even for super cheap so why no 26er?

    I don't need some light stuff, just durable.

    Thanks in advance

  95. #595
    tire to rim ratio tester
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,361
    I have a little story about 26 vs. 27.5. I'm saving up to build a 24 lb XC bike. One Chinese carbon frame builder has 27.5 and 26 frames, both modern geometry. That made me wonder if I could save extra weight with 26. It turns out, at least on paper, that I'd only save 1/2 lb with 26" vs. 27.5. And I can always run 26" wheels on a 27.5" anyway, so it's a no-brainer.
    Coffee, Ted?
    Ted's from a dysfunctional family.
    Oh...so no coffee...
    ---Samuel L. Jackson, Loaded Weapon I

  96. #596
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    63
    Well... I remember days when Avid, Truvativ, Sachs, and Sram were all separate companies, I still ride a Titus, and I remember many different names in the bike industry that either vanished, or got bought out by bigger companies - I'm not denying that there are new companies out there, but I still think that the ownership of brands became concentrated. This has many consequences - new products are brought quicker to market, and there is more resources for careful marketing and packaging of said goodies. With all the data available to manufacturers from social media - they can target their product at very specific audiences.

    You're absolutely right that it wasn't the big companies that jumped on the 29er band wagon - that it was the small players (though GF was owned by TREK as you said). But the smaller players didn't exactly capitalize on the 29er boom and now they are just along for the ride - big players have taken over the momentum (which is funny because 29ers are all about the momentum). If you go back 10 years Titus was proud of their 96ers even... I get all that. But the change from 26 to 27.5 is not exactly same as going from 26er to 29er... so why do it? It's not like a 26er has square wheels and there is nothing good about it. If you go back 10 years, 29er single speed bikes were the tools of the strongest riders on the trails, because you had to have the skill and strength to pull that off. Now 29ers sport huge range with crazy ratios - just to solve the problem where these bikes were hard to ride up the hill if the rider wasn't strong enough. We could have had 26ers and 29ers on the market with a few makers making 27.5... Look, I'm still close to the industry, and can tell you that new riders never came into the shop asking for a 27.5 - they might have asked about the 29er though. I think that the industry saw an opportunity and took it.

    I don't think that manufacturer making a small batch of reasonably priced - let's even say $500 - $700 26er forks would have a problem with selling them, same goes for 3x9 XT level components or any 3x components...

    How many people do you see riding on a road bike in a foul weather? Not many on New Jersey roads, and discs are not fool proof - I've had problems with Magura's leaking, pad contamination, bent rotors (yeah that won't be annoying on a road bike)... look - most bike companies these days are owned by investors who are looking for your dollars, gone are the days of passionate bike makers - now it's all market analysis and targeted marketing. On the road there is real opposition to the discs and the companies are pushing for that hard... no one can deny that. In reality, discs are only better in the wet, but even then it is down to the tire and the asphalt... BTW this marketing hoopla is affecting all aspects of our lives.. not just bikes, and with more powerful tools, marketing companies are able to sell us stuff because they sometimes know our habits than we do.

  97. #597
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,096
    Quote Originally Posted by OneTrustMan View Post
    Are there any "non super expensive" options for 26 inch front wheels in 110x15mm?

    Seriously there are shit tons of 27er and 29er available even for super cheap so why no 26er?

    I don't need some light stuff, just durable.

    Thanks in advance
    Define "not super expensive" since that will apply differently to different riders.
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  98. #598
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OneTrustMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by dbhammercycle View Post
    Define "not super expensive" since that will apply differently to different riders.
    Like something between 80 to 130 dollar.
    I can find only stuff for like 250 up to 500 dollar.

  99. #599
    Just A Mountain Biker.
    Reputation: blaklabl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,242
    I actually have this specific post bookmarked, as it may be my favorite on MTBR of all time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neuner View Post
    Man, discussions like these harden my heart for the sport. Just like quite a few others on here, I started Mtnbkg in the early 90s and have loved it ever since. I've made a lot of friends that way and have had some really awesome experiences. At that time, you would come across another Mtnbkr and you could guarantee they were pretty cool. One of the best group of guys you could know. It's how I encouraged my friends to get a bike and join me and they immediately noticed the same. No one cared what bike you had, what gear or even what you wore. Hell, if you were in cut off jeans and a skateboard helmet, the more experienced and hardcore you looked and it typically fit. They were the badasses on the trail.

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

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

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

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

    Wish everyone would take a chill pill, step away from this marketing BS that has destroyed the camaraderie of this sport, and go back to enjoying it as it was. Get on a bike, any bike, head to the trail and enjoy.
    MTBR: Your dad's online mountain bike forum.



  100. #600
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    9,034
    Quote Originally Posted by cbr6fs View Post
    Having an opinion based upon experience is not measurable though, there is just no data to suggest a 26" is "drastically inferior to larger diameter wheels"

    Some 27.5" tyres have the same or even smaller circumference than some 26" tyres
    So any "opinion" about 27.5" being noticeably better at anything than a 26" bike isn't really worth anything

    Even comparing 29" bikes to 26" bikes is pointless

    How many 26" bikes have the same geometry than 29" bikes?
    I can't think of any highly rated built within the last year that has 26" wheels

    The only real test is to fit 26" wheels to a modern 29" bike
    You have the same geometry, same groupset, so it's a fair comparison

    We have done this, not one of the 6 riders that tried it preferred the 29"wheels
    On the single track terrain we tested it on, every single rider preferred the quicker response when peddling and the sharper control on handling of the 26"

    The times didn't offer and conclusive proof
    All said the 26" wheels felt faster, some where faster with the 26" wheels, others were faster with the 29" wheels

    This is the problem
    People buy stuff then post how it's dramatically or drastically better, it's eases their mind in their choices physiologically
    The reality is that their opinions are not based on facts and their not subjective, as they're not comparing like to like

    As we're all adults it's really everyone's choice what they spend their hard earned on
    If i see a mate that's happy with his new bike, i'm really happy for him

    But to push the line that something that's not been measured or tested comparatively is "drastically inferior" is just wrong and not based on any facts what-so-ever

    If you prefer a 29er, good on ya, i think it's great that you've found something you're happy with.
    But you don't need to justify that choice by by using completely unsubstantiated opinions
    As I said, we each have to make our own way. Cheers!
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast

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: 504

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

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.