26? What's the point??!!- Mtbr.com
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 200 of 780
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700

    26? What's the point??!!

    I'm really interested in hearing what you love about your obsolete hoops. Okay I'll admit... I'm one of those people who bucks the tide, goes against the grain. I have issues with authority. I'll prove I can do it on 26" just because I can.

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

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

    That's me. That's my 26" preference.
    Last edited by chelboed; 01-06-2017 at 12:50 PM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: White7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    574
    I love mine because it's what I have and it's paid for

  3. #3
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,823
    Agree with White: They're paid for, and they're still round and stuff.

  4. #4
    Bikes in jeans
    Reputation: jestep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,137
    Lighter and currently a bargain to buy or build and they work... I don't think I'll ever race again, I have no desire to drop a few grand on a new bike probably ever again.

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

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

    If I were to get a newer bike, I'd be looking at a Salsa El Mariachi Titanium, however, it's not exactly new since they stopped making the ti version a few years ago. There's a few others, also titanium, 27.5 or 29ers I've looked at but long shot at this moment. The Salsa Bucksaw carbon looks like a blast, and if I still lived in Colorado, I'd seriously consider one, but it's no use to me living down in Texas now.
    WTB: Med Bontrager Ti Lite, PM Me...

  5. #5
    BOOM goes the dynamite!
    Reputation: noapathy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,559
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Agree with White: They're paid for, and they're still round and stuff.
    Round seems to be the predominant wheel shape thus far. Can't wait for the new pentagonal stuff to come to market! (Hey, if someone has to try to reinvent the wheel, might as well go the whole way.)

  6. #6
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    I love mine because they are bikes. They were fun when 26 was the standard and they are fun now, when they are no longer the standard; nothing has changed. I love my 29er as well as it is also a bike, but it definitely feels bigger, sometimes a good thing, sometimes not. I don't need to spend a lot of money on a bike or for the latest gear/trend as the increase in fun factor would be very minimal, if at all.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    I like the dialogue on this one.

    Often times I begin with wanting to stay with my platform because of money and what I have invested in the platform. This gives way now and then to some pretty "out-there" upgrades to keep my platform. (Hypocritical, or counterproductive?)

    This last time cost me dang near the cost of a Dragonslayer 26+ or 27.5+ when it was all said and done.

    But I'll be happier with this I think.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,096
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    I'm really interested in hearing what you love about your obsolete hoops. Okay I'll admit... I'm one of those people who bucks the tide, goes against the grain. I have issues with authority. I'll prove I can do it on 26" just because I can.
    ... because if you have a 26" that you like there is no reason on earth to spend thousands to get a 27" ...

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    5,097
    They're for kids ^^

    Sent from my kltedv using Tapatalk
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  10. #10
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,160
    There's a number of reasons...
    I got into riding in early 90's so everything from then is better of course...
    I've got my GT Xizang, this is my dream bike,I always wanted one. now it's not perfect, V-brakes work fine(but discs are better) and it probably doesn't fit me perfectly,maybe a bit long (or maybe i'm a bit fat, more like). But it looks gorgeous and I love it and is perfectly fine for most of my riding.
    Then I have my GT Zaskar, this was my original dream bike back in 92 until I discovered the Xizang existed,mines a reissue, so 4inch fork and discs... it fits me perfectly and handles amazingly, so far there is nothing I can't do that I can do on my 5inch 650b FS bike
    Then I have my Yeti ARC, nice bike, comfy, looks cool, probably also doesn't fit that well like the Xizang but it gets by fine.

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

    Only reason I bought a 650b FS bike in 2015 was well, 29er look silly and getting a new 26in XC FS bike is like impossible.
    All the gear and no idea.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    64
    Bought my Giant Warp DS3 in 2003 and have rebuilt and or upgraded ever since. It will be the bike I ride right until the end.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-img_0052.jpg  

    26? What's the point??!!-img_0046.jpg  


  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    10
    Because they are the 125cc 2-Strokes of the MTB world
    Costs keep going up up up for the newest must haves.
    All things being equal, yes some of the virtues of the 27.5 & 29 platforms may help or perform bettering some situations, but at end of day when I'm out on my 26 with a group of people skill and endurance are factors WAY before the bike itself.
    I do get a little nervous at times about availability of the newest designs and quality in tires more then anything.
    And there is that special feeling if you do kill a section, or destroy someone on the newest high dollar machines!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtbmike24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    149
    26inch wheels help keep me sharp and my skill up. Riding a hardtail on top of that really helps with my core fitness. I love to feel the trail I'm riding..... I get all this with my 26 inch bikes. I don't buy the hype and never will. I understand the smooth feeling of a 29er on the trail and understand its place for some the 27.5/650b thing is kind of a head scratcher for me. I am also well aware and understand its the rider not the bike all my friends have high dollar very expensive 29ers and 27.5 full suspensions except one has a hardtail titanium 29er and I'm the fastest of the group on my 26 by a long way on the climbs and the flats its not even close. We did a standing down hill on payment I was on my single speed 26 we coasted down this road no peddling my bike put a 20ft gap on everyone by the time we hit the bottom of the hill. thing is the 29er math that critics are shoving down my throat doesn't seem to add up when I'm out riding hence why I don't buy the hype its that simple for me. Ride what you want and be happy just don't drop the wheel size I love because everyone else thinks I should ride wagon wheels. It's gotten so bad that I bring my bike in for its free annual tune at the bike shop and they try to sell my a 29er by telling me my bike is obsolete.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-wp_20141015_11_02_14_raw_fotor-1.jpg  


  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbmike24 View Post
    26inch wheels help keep me sharp and my skill up. Riding a hardtail on top of that really helps with my core fitness. I love to feel the trail I'm riding..... I get all this with my 26 inch bikes. I don't buy the hype and never will. I understand the smooth feeling of a 29er on the trail and understand its place for some the 27.5/650b thing is kind of a head scratcher for me. I am also well aware and understand its the rider not the bike all my friends have high dollar very expensive 29ers and 27.5 full suspensions except one has a hardtail titanium 29er and I'm the fastest of the group on my 26 by a long way on the climbs and the flats its not even close. We did a standing down hill on payment I was on my single speed 26 we coasted down this road no peddling my bike put a 20ft gap on everyone by the time we hit the bottom of the hill. thing is the 29er math that critics are shoving down my throat doesn't seem to add up when I'm out riding hence why I don't buy the hype its that simple for me. Ride what you want and be happy just don't drop the wheel size I love because everyone else thinks I should ride wagon wheels. It's gotten so bad that I bring my bike in for its free annual tune at the bike shop and they try to sell my a 29er by telling me my bike is obsolete.
    That... Is...A BEAUTIFUL backdrop!! You need room mate??

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    8
    I have a 27.5 enduro bike with 160mm fork and 150mm rear travel and its quite fun for most things.
    However I come primary from a dirt jump, slopestyle, and dual slalom racing background. In which 26" is still tending to be a norm,
    Unfortunately I out grow my dirt jump and old slopestype bikes so moving to a enduring was a new thing to ride all forms of terrain and get into singletrack. After about 4 months riding the Ft Force X I have started to love single track riding but still feel a little piece missing, especially when I go to a pumptrack or dirt jump park. Because of this I went out and bought a 27.5 hardtail frame that I am building with old parts so this means I am going to run 26" wheels on it, this isn't that big of a deal for me because I'm going to use it for racing dual slalom and riding dirt jumps again. So in my eyes 26 is dead for some but not all parts of the sport.

  16. #16
    650b me
    Reputation: golden boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,477
    It's all about the feel. 26" wheels spin up quicker and slow down faster. They're more flickable. I can steer with my hips on descents. They're so responsive, they feel telepathic. I think it, and they do it. Yes, they force you to make better line selections, but that's part of the fun for me. It's cliche now, but 26" wheels are like a sports car; as you go up in size, they become more like monster trucks.

    Or I could just summarize and say I have more fun on 26" wheeled bikes.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,294
    My 26er has bigger wheels than my 650b bike... So it's not size. Its also taller and larger in general.

    It's a cost thing, or a nostalgia thing.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eric Malcolm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbmike24 View Post
    26inch wheels help keep me sharp and my skill up. Riding a hardtail on top of that really helps with my core fitness. I love to feel the trail I'm riding..... I get all this with my 26 inch bikes. I don't buy the hype and never will. I understand the smooth feeling of a 29er on the trail and understand its place for some the 27.5/650b thing is kind of a head scratcher for me. I am also well aware and understand its the rider not the bike all my friends have high dollar very expensive 29ers and 27.5 full suspensions except one has a hardtail titanium 29er and I'm the fastest of the group on my 26 by a long way on the climbs and the flats its not even close. We did a standing down hill on payment I was on my single speed 26 we coasted down this road no peddling my bike put a 20ft gap on everyone by the time we hit the bottom of the hill. thing is the 29er math that critics are shoving down my throat doesn't seem to add up when I'm out riding hence why I don't buy the hype its that simple for me. Ride what you want and be happy just don't drop the wheel size I love because everyone else thinks I should ride wagon wheels. It's gotten so bad that I bring my bike in for its free annual tune at the bike shop and they try to sell my a 29er by telling me my bike is obsolete.
    Well said. I am always entertained by riding mine. I am aware of the 26" deficiencies in some situations, but I don't ride in an area where they are exposed. Rather, I expose the deficencies of the riders of these bikes as I believe it is more a head thing than ability. And besides, someone in the industry made a lot of money in the con of all of this. And I don't feel the need to support the 'con'.

    Eric
    If I don't make an attempt, how will I know if it will work?

  19. #19
    Dave's not here.
    Reputation: MiWolverine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    428
    I still have and ride a 26er because I have no interest in bigger, "better" wheels. I have no interest in KOMs. I have no interest in pissing matches in parking lots about who spent the most on their bike (and still can't ride it for shit). I have no faith in the bike industry anymore. I have been riding a 26er for a better part of 20 years and am still able to manage just fine. And, most importantly, I am too old to give a shit about new fads and such. I simply ride what I have and enjoy the hell out of it.
    Yo no hablo inglés

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AllMountin''s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,100
    26ers are better for pumping, jumping, and have stronger wheels, all things being equal. Better thru quick chicanes. Better for trials type maneuvers. Better at most of the things that exemplify great riding.

    I ride 26 because it's better at the things that I value most in riding. Because I'll gladly sacrifice 5 seconds/lap in rolling efficiency for a bike that is a bit funner and more dynamic.

  21. #21
    650b me
    Reputation: golden boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,477
    Loving so many of these responses! Keep up the 26" passion.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 53119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,279
    i 26 cuz i absolutely and unequivocally give minusfks and they still make minions in 26.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    I will admit, my 26er SS is b'ed. However, the other rides are 26" skinnies and fatties. Also, I'm building a 26 SS wheelset that will work in both my geared and as another wheelset for my MUSS. I put together a NOS '07 RMB Blizzard a few years ago with some nice parts on the cheap. It's the bike I always wanted and that hasn't changed. The 26 fatties just make the winter easier. 26 is working, why change?
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  24. #24
    J:
    Reputation: Deerhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,128

    yes...

    twenty s'xers are sixy
    video=youtube;][/video]...

  25. #25
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: str8edgMTBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    3,182
    I don't feel like my (the) 26er is obsolete...it is just not trendy now.

    Mine was part of my bike evolution:

    BMX-20"
    first MTB - 26"
    most recent MTB - 29+

    none have replaced the others. they ALL get ridden for different applications...AND, they all get ridden for the same applications. My BMX sees just as much time on the trails as my 29+ does at the skatepark. Granted, the 29+ at the skatepark gets more weird looks than the BMX on the dirt trails....
    Go practice. Figure it out. - Fleas

    15 Surly Krampus - King Amongst Bikes
    LET IT SNOW!

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtbmike24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    149
    I would love to buy a new bike unfortunately the bike industry has dropped me as a potential consumer. I guess its custom builds from now on for me

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mtbmike24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    149
    I went to a local trail last year with 2 of my friends and they brought along another guy I had never met before he had a really nice 29er and he was all kitted up he rides alot and does race. This was a flowy trail double track with short climbs and smooth high bank sweeping turns you can carry lots of speed without slowing much. The guys on the big wheels just couldn't hang and after about half way through the ride the guy I had never met pipes up and says you have a unfair advantage REALLY!!!! Since when does anyone give 26ers have an advantage over anything now days. I was having so much fun popping off short whoops and just laying down the power feeling the immediate power transfer out of the turns then slamming the remote lockout grabbing my bar ends getting out of the saddle and destroying the climbs actually pulling a wheelie while cresting the hills...... just nothing like it!!!!
    I want to add one for thing its a travesty that some smaller riders have never even ridden a 26 inch mountain bike and have no idea what I'm talking about.

  28. #28
    Maaaaan
    Reputation: Ericmopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,259
    Better is relative.
    I have a older Mountain Cycle Fury which is 26" with very nice components.
    Why would I want to spend upwards of $3000 to get crappy stuff that wears quicker etc.
    The mountain bike industry is so far up it's ass in "Robber Baron" mode right now, that if my frame breaks, I'll probably stick to pavement.
    Communist Party Member Since 1917.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cookieMonster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    843
    I purchased my 2012 Spec. SX Trail (26er) in 2013 for a damn good price. The only thing "out of date" on my bike is the wheel size. They got the geometry perfect, in my opinion. 65 degree HA, low BB, fairly steep ST angle. I can climb all day on this bike (and have, many times) and it descends like a modern DH bike. Suspension performance has not gotten better since 2012, in fact, it topped-out a long time ago. If you ask me, the dropper-post has been the single biggest advance in the sport in the last decade and a half.

    On local climbs, I pass the vast majority of people I encounter, and I pass them quickly in most cases. On the downhill, I am way faster than the average rider, which, by the way is probably on a 650B or 29er. There is a certain point of pride I take in outriding nearly everyone I encounter without needing to have the latest and greatest. I keep all of this to myself, of course; and to be honest, I'm really only competitive with myself.

    So I'm at the point where I'm really happy with my bike, and it happens to be a 26er. I will continue to ride it until I can't get Maxxis Minion 2.5s for it anymore, or the frame breaks. I figure I'd have to spend 5 grand to get a comparable bike to mine in 650b trim. That's not exaggerating. I don't race, so spending that kind of coin would be ridiculous.
    Bikes belong in Wilderness areas.:)

  30. #30
    Rent this space for $
    Reputation: Oh My Sack!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,597
    Because 650b and 29 are easier...just like an eBike. I don't need easy. I'm only 55.

    And then there's this...

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

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

    I'll be wearing this one out.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-2015-09-16_20.36.37%5B1%5D.jpg  

    26? What's the point??!!-20160306_131752_zpsyljfmwyy.jpg  


  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    122
    Like most here I have a modern 29er as well as two older 26ers. I began my mountain biking on a 26er and see no reason to stop riding one even though they're vintage bikes. I also love driving my vintage '65 Mustang when I have the opportunity. Both the Mustang and the 26ers make me smile for the same reasons: the experience and the individuality.

  32. #32
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,902
    Quote Originally Posted by AllMountin' View Post
    26ers are better for pumping, jumping, and have stronger wheels, all things being equal. Better thru quick chicanes. Better for trials type maneuvers. Better at most of the things that exemplify great riding.

    I ride 26 because it's better at the things that I value most in riding. Because I'll gladly sacrifice 5 seconds/lap in rolling efficiency for a bike that is a bit funner and more dynamic.
    I like the way you think.
    Working to stomp out redundancy, I repeat, working to stomp out redundancy.

  33. #33
    Rent this space for $
    Reputation: Oh My Sack!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,597
    ^^ Total agreement on that, above.

    My 26'r on Demo Flow Trail is insane fun! As well, here on my tight turned, chunky local trails.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,398
    Quote Originally Posted by targnik View Post
    They're for kids ^^
    and hobbits.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    465
    Quote Originally Posted by golden boy View Post
    It's all about the feel. 26" wheels spin up quicker and slow down faster. They're more flickable. I can steer with my hips on descents. They're so responsive, they feel telepathic. I think it, and they do it. Yes, they force you to make better line selections, but that's part of the fun for me. It's cliche now, but 26" wheels are like a sports car; as you go up in size, they become more like monster trucks.

    Or I could just summarize and say I have more fun on 26" wheeled bikes.
    Nicely said. I have always felt the 26" wheel bike is more intuitive on descents. Your body makes small unconscious adjustments for technicla terrain that are part of the skill set. I like to race here and there, and appreciate the stability of my 29er on courses I am not familiar with (coming up on my mid 50s, I like to stay off the ground more). But on a familiar descent, there is no comparison what I can do on the 26 compared to the 29 (Avid Ti V-Brakes=one-finger braking). Lent my 26er ST to a buddy, who has been hanging onto it. Got one more old 26er in the attic I am hoping to find time to reassemble. Looking forward to improving my balance skills too.

  36. #36
    JORBA Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    183
    Like most guys on 26ers, I got my start on a 26 and never felt the need to "upgrade" to a larger size. I tried 27.5 and 29ers at my LBS and they just seemed heavy and cumbersome. Not wanting to rule them out completely, I tried my buddy's 27.5 Giant and I couldn't wait to get off the thing. It was heavy, felt bulky, and didn't respond anywhere near my 26. The funny part is while I was riding my buddy's 27.5 2015 Giant, he was riding my 96 Gary Fisher Joshua Y and didn't want to give it back. He said he felt comfortable on the 27.5, but the ride was 100% better on my 26. Luckily for him I have 2 more 26ers to ride so i let him ride the fish for the rest of the summer. I've always been one for "ride what makes you happy", but also don't rule out the other styles just because they aren't trendy at the moment.. you may be missing out on a great ride ;-)

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    846
    How else can you get a full suspension S-Works FSR loaded with premium components under $1300?

    And it is light and very nimble.

    26? What's the point??!!-specialized-2001-fsr-xc-s-works.png

  38. #38
    650b me
    Reputation: golden boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,477
    Nicely done, MudSnow! I had to look for my eBay handle on your spreadsheet...I sell a lot of bike parts on eBay. Now, back to our regularly-scheduled programming.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    661
    Not everyone can afford to buy a new bike. My 26'er has a modern XT 1X11 drivetrain, decent enough geometry and can handle the type of riding I do. I'd love to buy a new bike but the only thing holding back my riding experience right now is my own fitness level, not the bike.

  40. #40
    Oaktown Honkey on Strava
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    3,036

    I built mine piece by piece. I can't seem to break it.

    It seems like I'm usually waiting at the bottom of the hill, for my friends with bigger wheel bikes. Then I have to listen to them tell me I need a better bike. Funny.
    Attachment 1115103

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10
    They are playful.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,460
    Obsolete? I love my fatty running tubeless, saves 1 lb per wheel. yes it's a 26er.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    499
    when I come to certain obstacles most of the riders i ride with, ride over it, if I have the speed, my 26r spreads its wings

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    4
    In years to come, when bike companies decide to extract yet more money from people with a new "revolutionary" size, someone will make a similar comment (or comments based on the 2 threads you've started on this!) about 27.5 & 29.
    Bit like vinyl/CD/MP3; vinyl is growing in popularity nowadays thanks in part to nostalgia, but mostly to its superior audio quality

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    245
    I am sticking with my 26ers because they do everything I request from them and more. I do not push either one to its fullest potential. I don't race, nor do I care about PRs, lap time, etc. If I can't climb or descend as efficiently as newer bikes, oh well.

    Sure, it would be nice to have a sub 24 pound carbon FS bike with all the latest technology and newer geometry. I don't think anyone could logically argue that they aren't valid improvements. But those improvements aren't worth the cost for me. For many others, who ride differently, they get a great enough of a ROI that it is worth it to them.
    "Holy crap, you are creepy as shit sneaking up on me wearing that collar with that freaky ass smile."




  46. #46
    Dave's not here.
    Reputation: MiWolverine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by May73 View Post
    In years to come, when bike companies decide to extract yet more money from people with a new "revolutionary" size, someone will make a similar comment (or comments based on the 2 threads you've started on this!) about 27.5 & 29.
    Bit like vinyl/CD/MP3; vinyl is growing in popularity nowadays thanks in part to nostalgia, but mostly to its superior audio quality
    Thanks for that, Captain Obvious. All this time, I never thought that happened. From the horse and buggy to the VHS/Betamax, there has never been people resistant to change.
    Yo no hablo inglés

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    4
    Bless

  48. #48
    Bikes in jeans
    Reputation: jestep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,137
    Well, this was fun while it lasted...
    WTB: Med Bontrager Ti Lite, PM Me...

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dbhammercycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,486
    Since the VHS/BetaMax war was brought up, I'm wondering what side of the wheel size debate the Porn industry favors? They lost the HD DVD/Blu-ray war, but they still got some clout.

    Why am I even asking, they are obviously big wheel people...
    I don't know why,... it's just MUSS easier to pedal than the other ones.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    336
    When I moved to the mountains I picked up a 27.5" full-suspension and never looked back. Had to bring it in for a big service ($$$) so I went for a ride on my neglected 26" singlespeed - wow, such a fun/responsive ride!

    Call me sentimental I guess - I like my 26" since it's been with me through 4 countries, conversion to single speed, new paint job, added disk tabs, etc, etc. Next up are perhaps some new rims and a dropper...

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    In grade school, my brother and I rode what we called "clunkers" with 20" wheels in a dump.

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

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

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

    Time passes.

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

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

    I continue to single speed part time.

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

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


    Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    149
    I just jumped on my old 26" aluminum Schwinn with Maxxis tires for a bit today. After riding a 29er for awhile, the 26 felt so fun, even if it was a $100 bike. It felt tiny like a BMX. If I could magically appear at the top of the trail every ride, Id choose 26".

  53. #53
    Self Appointed Judge&Jury
    Reputation: DIRTJUNKIE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    34,925
    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD42 View Post
    Bought my Giant Warp DS3 in 2003 and have rebuilt and or upgraded ever since. It will be the bike I ride right until the end.
    The end of what? The world?
    Quote Originally Posted by mileslong View Post
    I passionately remove rocks and corners and other stuff I find too hard to ride.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,000
    cuz i cant afford a new bike worth more than my car. so have always bought used. and upgrade parts as i go. usually used also. my bike drops off, jumps, pumps, and hits berms to have a good time. dont care about strava any more. 27.5 wont make me jump further, jib sections harder. When the time comes i will buy a good condition used 650b rig. almost tempted to go 26 again with a used uprising.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8
    Started in the early 90's on a Diamondback, gave it away late 90's, became a father in 2005 and got back into it in 2009 with a budget secondhand 26'er hardtail. Spent more and more time on bike with my son and loved it so that it got to the stage I had to upgrade his bike a couple of times over for size and mine for skills. I can't afford to drop $3k+ on new but for $1100 I got a very nicely specced 5" with a Pike fork, mainly XT components and 26" rims, I'm not fast enough to push this bike to its limits and at 45yo probably never will be. Could it be lighter, have bigger wheels or be more on trend in paint scheme??? Yeah but I don't care, I got better things to spend $$$ on like my boy and his younger brothers bikes in the next few years

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,000
    Because no matter how fast I feel I am at times, 27.5 or 29 will not get me in the top 10 on strava trails I care about. Because those guys were still that much faster before 29 even hit the scene. Skills and experience count for way more than the 1% effeciency you gain.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,000
    Because my suspension is so dialed Bros....... my 26 feels 27.5

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    64
    The end of me or the bike. Either until I can't ride any more or I break the bike beyond repair. At this point in time I think the bike will outlast me, I ride trails just not as crazy as I did 20'years ago.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    358
    well I am poor and put my bikes together with what I drug off for free or nearly free....I have bought a few new parts along the way, but nothing too spendy.... both are 26" with the newest of the 2 being a 1997, but it is really pieced together with what I could find....its my SS beater/commuter/city bike.... my other one is a 91 and it was fairly complete when I got it
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-bike-372.jpg  

    Attached Images Attached Images  
    97 specialized rockhopper.- urban beater
    2013 GT aggressor 3.0- urban assault vehicle

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mrgto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    455
    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD42 View Post
    Bought my Giant Warp DS3 in 2003 and have rebuilt and or upgraded ever since. It will be the bike I ride right until the end.
    Do you even ride that bike? It's so clean!

  61. #61
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by May73 View Post
    Bit like vinyl/CD/MP3; vinyl is growing in popularity nowadays thanks in part to nostalgia, but mostly to its superior audio quality
    It's a good analogy with bikes:
    The 26ers are come back in fashion in 10 years , people are gonna realize how fast and responsive they are compared to old 29ers.
    I had to order a custom made frame to keep a 26 setup ...... sad......


    PS : I know that we're in a bike forum but about the vinyl comeback :
    it is 75% nostalgia and 25% to be cool.
    Nothing about sound , in fact , the difference perceived in sound quality is mostly due to the higher distortion with vinyl. (if you compare to uncompressed digital sound)
    Distortion is giving "a certain sound" that digital doesn't have.
    Same thing with tube amps , certain people prefer them because of the higher distortion.
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrugStoreCowboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by KeithD42 View Post
    Bought my Giant Warp DS3 in 2003 and have rebuilt and or upgraded ever since. It will be the bike I ride right until the end.

    That looks sharp!!

  63. #63
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: str8edgMTBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    3,182
    Quote Originally Posted by fokof View Post
    It's a good analogy with bikes:
    The 26ers are come back in fashion in 10 years , people are gonna realize how fast and responsive they are compared to old 29ers.
    I had to order a custom made frame to keep a 26 setup ...... sad......


    PS : I know that we're in a bike forum but about the vinyl comeback :
    it is 75% nostalgia and 25% to be cool.
    Nothing about sound , in fact , the difference perceived in sound quality is mostly due to the higher distortion with vinyl. (if you compare to uncompressed digital sound)
    Distortion is giving "a certain sound" that digital doesn't have.
    Same thing with tube amps , certain people prefer them because of the higher distortion.
    this is why I didn't get rid of my 26. I like to ride both my 29+ and my 26...

    I like both albums and digital...when I "replaced" much of my vinyl with CD's, I didn't get rid of the vinyl. The CD's just allowed me to listen elsewhere other than my living room
    Go practice. Figure it out. - Fleas

    15 Surly Krampus - King Amongst Bikes
    LET IT SNOW!

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by rockhopper97 View Post
    well I am poor and put my bikes together with what I drug off for free or nearly free....I have bought a few new parts along the way, but nothing too spendy.... both are 26" with the newest of the 2 being a 1997, but it is really pieced together with what I could find....its my SS beater/commuter/city bike.... my other one is a 91 and it was fairly complete when I got it
    That kangaroo pouch is epic

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    6
    better said impossible Craig, Is right!

  66. #66
    Pro Crastinator
    Reputation: .WestCoastHucker.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,883
    26" wheels make my schwanznoodle look bigger...


  67. #67
    wg
    wg is offline
    Fermented Grain Sampler
    Reputation: wg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,134
    My bank account is not subject to fashion trends.
    The Knolly is a 26 and I don't think I'm going to outlast or "outskill" that frame. Shopping replacement rims now and have learned that I am woefully behind in my MTB wheel knowledge.
    Don't harsh my mello

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by hoolie View Post
    It seems like I'm usually waiting at the bottom of the hill, for my friends with bigger wheel bikes. Then I have to listen to them tell me I need a better bike. Funny.
    Attachment 1115103
    That was a huge f'in tree!! Nice bike BTW

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by gsmith462 View Post
    That was a huge f'in tree!! Nice bike BTW
    That is a huge tree!!! 26 is here to stay IMHO!!

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    163
    I have a modern 27.5 and an old Trance X 26". I ride with buddies who have 27.5 or 29er Yetis, Treks, Banshees and Giants. I've had the opportunity to ride their bikes and my old 26 back to back. It always blows my mind how light a cheap aluminum 26 Trance X frame is compared to the 'modern' 27.5 Trance frames. I know they gained some suspension (125mm vs 140mm) but wow they got fat. Most of my riding could be done on a 100mm XC bike so my older Trance X3 suits it just fine - and is light, and was very cheap.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,460
    Quote Originally Posted by akiracornell View Post
    Because no matter how fast I feel I am at times, 27.5 or 29 will not get me in the top 10 on strava trails I care about. Because those guys were still that much faster before 29 even hit the scene. Skills and experience count for way more than the 1% effeciency you gain.
    Because all the pros race on 26ers now? Umm, not. They ride 29ers to be slower, nope.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,568
    Maybe the trails he cares about aren't the type of trails that they run pro XC races on?

    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Because all the pros race on 26ers now? Umm, not. They ride 29ers to be slower, nope.
    The pros are all sponsored and ride what the manufacturers give them. I don't ride them for the same reason I don't road bike, they suck the joy out of riding.

    For fun factor 26 is king!

    Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    13
    For me it's simply I cannot afford a new bike, so I make sure not to demo or ride anything that may be better than what I have, otherwise I will want one.

    I have bought used for the last 10 years, and will likely keep doing so because I can't afford new bikes anymore.

    I bought a used Giant Trance X3 26er a couple years ago and will likely still have it for a long time!

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    92
    Here is something interesting. I ride with a SS 26". I don't ride with groups. I am just starting out in MTB since I have been a roadie for over 7 years and into local racing for 4 years. I don't ride with groups and so I have no peer pressures. LOL I could be riding a $5k FS bike and no one would care or know. I am not good enough to race MTB. So, it would make no sense to follow the pro trend. Around here, NYC Long Island, the trails can easily be ridden with a SS!!!!! No hills or mountains. Mostly technical single track.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    628
    I started riding bikes off road in the 70's.
    When mtn bikes were first being invented (progress was reported/documented in the BMX rags of the day) they went through all this wheel size experimentation... and 26" won and reigned for 20 years.
    OK, that aside.
    I bought a new off the rack RM Slayer in 2014 for dirt cheap because 27.5 was on the rise.
    At 5'6" in height and riding a small frame, I really don't need the extra wheel base, stand over or bar height associated with the larger hoops. The bike has modern geometry, modern suspension and modern drivetrain. I ride technical (rough hiking trails) terrain where DH bike suspension is welcome (nearly required), and no longer care about climbing, so long as I get to the top I'm good, however I like to let it rip and play on the descents.
    I have no desire to go to a bigger(sloppier?) bike.
    I rode xc on a 29'r once. I see why they are popular, but still have no desire to own one.
    My bike, Slayer 70

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgto View Post
    Do you even ride that bike? It's so clean!
    I do ride that bike. I wipe it down after riding and I don't crash. That's the idea right to keep the rubber side down. Plus the picture was taken right after I had finished the last upgrade and cleaned it up.

  78. #78
    Braille Riding Instructor
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,146
    Great thread.

    When I am faster, it's because I am fitter and riding more. I'm obviously much slower climbing at 225 pounds than at 195 pounds; the size of the wheels surrounding me aren't much of a factor.

    But we sometimes grow bored with our toys, so after 10 seasons on 26-inch hardtails, I jumped into a squishy 650b last year. It's been a blast, but I also kept my hardtail and still use it.

    Ride what you like and love what you ride. Spend the money if it motivates you to ride more or if there is some other need to address (e.g., comfort, changes in style or terrain), but don't for a moment think the advantages or disadvantages between the wheelsizes are statistically significant for the Average Joe. In most cases, we're talking about seconds, not hours or even minutes.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Well played, sir! I like the bike I have and don't plan on changing just because of some 'new' wheel sizes. Enjoying myself is paramount. Everything else is secondary and inconsequential.
    I also read an interwebz blurb not too long ago claiming 26 is a good choice if you plan on touring in parts of the world not likely to have a large selection of wheel sizes.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by DrugStoreCowboy View Post
    That looks sharp!!
    Thanks, I fell in love with it isn 2003, then didn't ride much over the next 4-5 years. I have gotten back into it and parts started to break or weren't as efficient as they once were so I rebuilt it. It is such a better bike than it was before. The modern suspension & components have really made it even more enjoyable than it already was.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    55
    I have no need for a new bike and plan on riding mine into the ground. My son has a 29er and I really see no difference when we go riding.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    186
    Because I started with a used frame (08 5-spot) and built and upgraded it piece by piece over time... It may be a bitzer, but it's like an extension of me now and I will keep it until it breaks or I do...

    That said, I've never owned a vehicle (2 or 4 wheels) that I haven't modified extensively and become overly attached too... I just get way to sentimental about nuts and bolts


  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Mdp3612 View Post
    I have no need for a new bike and plan on riding mine into the ground. My son has a 29er and I really see no difference when we go riding.
    Many people feel the need to own the latest, whiz bang stuff. Is it any better? For them, maybe. For me, no. I'm happy with my 27 year old Marin. If anybody says I'm 'outdated' they can go have carnal knowledge of themselves
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  84. #84
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by OlMarin View Post
    If anybody says I'm 'outdated' they can go have carnal knowledge of themselves
    Quote of the day! lol
    This space intentionally left blank.

  85. #85
    Snow Dog
    Reputation: str8edgMTBMXer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    3,182
    Step sons first "real bike" bought with part of his own money ---> 26" Fuji
    Step sons first real trail ride ---> on 26
    me with him on my good old 1994 Trek 26er
    beginning of a lifetime of riding and bonding with each other
    ...enough of a "point" for me...

    26? What's the point??!!-img_0300.jpg26? What's the point??!!-img_0116.jpg26? What's the point??!!-img_0110.jpg26? What's the point??!!-img_0111.jpg
    Go practice. Figure it out. - Fleas

    15 Surly Krampus - King Amongst Bikes
    LET IT SNOW!

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    245
    Quote Originally Posted by wg View Post
    My bank account is not subject to fashion trends.
    The Knolly is a 26 and I don't think I'm going to outlast or "outskill" that frame.
    +1. My 2007 Yeti 575 with its 68 degree HTA and 430 mm chainstays refuses to let itself be considered "obsolete".
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-image.jpg  

    "Holy crap, you are creepy as shit sneaking up on me wearing that collar with that freaky ass smile."




  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    28
    Great read.
    In 29 years of riding I've had all the sizes (even an old 28"wheeled Czech road bike.
    Most of the mountain bikes were 26", some steel hardtails, then 3 SC Hecklers on 26".
    Went 29" carbon HT 6 years ago, which was really fast, and really scary for the North Shore riding I do.
    Went to a 650B full suspension 3 years ago, and really like it. Rolls over everything and made me a way better descender, at 55 years old.
    Son decided to join the fun, so he picked up a used 2011 SC Nomad, with light 26" wheels. It's about 4 lbs lighter than mine, but less travel.

    Final verdict- I use his Nomad whenever possible. Way more 'playful', as the experts like to say. Feels way lighter, and descends very well. I'm fastest on it, and he kicks my butt when he's on it. For $1800 I would say he won the arguement in our house.

    Still want a 26" Ti HT someday.....
    Last edited by schwangster; 04-17-2017 at 11:14 AM. Reason: get dates straight

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bob_Preskit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    89

    Lightweight and acceleration

    A couple reasons: I started out riding 26” so that’s what I prefer. Also weight savings and acceleration. I have a Cannondale hardtail (M) from ’99 that is nearly sub-20 pounds with just a few carbon parts (bars and seatpost). It accelerates like a rocket and climbs easily for me. For someone who has only ridden a 29 and then hops on my bike, I hear both complaints and compliments. The main complaint is that it feels too twitchy and “out of control” for them on fast choppy descents, to the point where they were downright scared. Alternately they were simply blown away at how fast it accelerates after hard braking and exiting flat corners. Overall, most 29 only riders said it was borderline too sketchy to ride and not fun for them. For me, it’s as fun and comfortable as I can get. I’ll keep pedaling it until I can no longer get my tires of choice. I don’t have a problem with choices. IE: 29, 27.5, and 26. Just don’t eliminate one for the other.

  89. #89
    VENI VEDI BIKI
    Reputation: skankingbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    838
    They work. They are fun. Since I have not had the time for many club/group rides the last few years, I find myself less and less having PBS or yearning for n+1 and am able to just enjoy what i have.
    Veni Vidi Biki

    I came, I saw, I biked.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    76
    have an '08 Haro Shift R3 for 7 years, if I have to replace it, it'll be a new Shift S3, which is a 27.5, providing it doesn't ride really different. i'm not really into the size debate, but if it works at the size, then great!

  91. #91
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Because I would need to go out and spend $4,000 to get a new 27.5" bike comparable to this one.

    $4k just to get a different wheel size? I don't think so.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  92. #92
    Hell Track
    Reputation: crewjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    899
    Has nothing to do with size for me. All about $$$. I'm sure I'd be happy with other wheel sizes and when I find the right bike at a blowout deal I'll jump on it. regardless of wheel size. retail is for suckers

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    I am a sucker. I'm​ one of those who has a plus bike with three wheelsets for different tire sizes! Aye aye aye!

    But most of the time I ride 26 because I dig it.

    Then when I get on the puffy plus bike or the rollover 29er, it's like being in vacation.

    Usually though, it's all about the 26" SS.

    26 FOREVER!

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  94. #94
    Hell Track
    Reputation: crewjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    899
    Not really, I was just joking. That's what's nice about being a grown up, we can spend our money however we want. unless you're married

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Because I would need to go out and spend $4,000 to get a new 27.5" bike comparable to this one.

    $4k just to get a different wheel size? I don't think so.
    Quote Originally Posted by crewjones View Post
    Has nothing to do with size for me. All about $$$. I'm sure I'd be happy with other wheel sizes and when I find the right bike at a blowout deal I'll jump on it. regardless of wheel size. retail is for suckers
    For me it is ALL about $$$. I didn't retire early by spending all my money on things I don't need.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    942
    I own a top of the line XC 26 bike, because I like to mock my friends, it also makes me unique in the group as no ones ride a 26 anymore. They are also always wondering how a 26er can outride them, flats included.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10
    I found a 2012 model of my favorite so I will enjoy it for eternity. FTW

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    I've been watching the wheels market. You can still get quite a variety and get into the good sh/um stuff without having to build your own wheels.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  99. #99
    Hell Track
    Reputation: crewjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    899
    Quote Originally Posted by OlMarin View Post
    For me it is ALL about $$$. I didn't retire early by spending all my money on things I don't need.
    OlMarin I like the way you think. I'm debt free and buy almost everything used. I hope to retire one day as well

  100. #100
    Looking for Adventure
    Reputation: Ricksom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,060
    In the beginning, mountain bikes were designed and tinkered by engineers and/or inventors with a knack for tech and a vision. Then came the big recession of 2008, and bike companies needed something new to boost sales, pushing the role of whats now product managers to create new market "categories". Armed with advanced marketing, pseudo science, and alternate facts, they created brand shiny new "holy grails" called 29ers and fat bikes.

    Now both the 29er and fat bikes have their unique and special place in the biking world, but so much functionality has been sacrificed with the dropping of the 26er bike. Agility, acceleration, lightness, climbing ability, versatility, and frame stiffness, once the foundation of mountain bike tech standards, has been lost with these new bikes. 29ers and fat bikes will never achieve this in a simple and cost effective manner, hence why you have to pay so much more now to get a performance bike. You need more tech to achieve performance that was once so natural with the 26er.

    I have no doubt that the 26er will return sometime in the 2020's, but first the industry will wait until most of the existing 26ers will age, disappear, and be almost forgotten to maximize full sales and profitability potential as the new "holy grail".

    Welcome to the modern age of product marketing management. I've heard that the old top loading washer is back as new advanced tech...too funny :O
    SUCCESS - To be able to spend life in your own way

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by crewjones View Post
    OlMarin I like the way you think. I'm debt free and buy almost everything used. I hope to retire one day as well
    The OlMarin came to me used. The frame had been hanging in the sun behind a now defunct bike shop for roughly 18 months. The owner was a good friend and going outa bidness. Plus he had boxes of parts............
    I built up a fugly commuter. 24 years later it finally got a refinish.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  102. #102
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079

    26? What's the point??!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ricksom View Post
    In the beginning, mountain bikes were designed and tinkered by engineers and/or inventors with a knack for tech and a vision. Then came the big recession of 2008, and bike companies needed something new to boost sales, pushing the role of whats now product managers to create new market "categories". Armed with advanced marketing, pseudo science, and alternate facts, they created brand shiny new "holy grails" called 29ers and fat bikes.

    Now both the 29er and fat bikes have their unique and special place in the biking world, but so much functionality has been sacrificed with the dropping of the 26er bike. Agility, acceleration, lightness, climbing ability, versatility, and frame stiffness, once the foundation of mountain bike tech standards, has been lost with these new bikes. 29ers and fat bikes will never achieve this in a simple and cost effective manner, hence why you have to pay so much more now to get a performance bike. You need more tech to achieve performance that was once so natural with the 26er.

    I have no doubt that the 26er will return sometime in the 2020's, but first the industry will wait until most of the existing 26ers will age, disappear, and be almost forgotten to maximize full sales and profitability potential as the new "holy grail".

    Welcome to the modern age of product marketing management. I've heard that the old top loading washer is back as new advanced tech...too funny :O
    FWIW, 29ers were selling quite well before the recession.

    But it is a moot point, because the final demise of 26" has little to do with 29ers or fat bikes. They were never going to replace 26" for a lot of trail riders.

    27.5 is what put the nail in 26's coffin.

    27.5 is the new 26.

    I would not hold my breath for the return of 26" for anything but specialty niches (like dirt jumping and trials).
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Kapusta, in the beginning, nuts decided to name a hill Repack. These nuts started with old 26" 'cruisers', a.k.a. junque. This hill became Repack because you'd have to repack the coaster brake hub after every run.
    That said, the 26" wheel size will never go away. You can get tires everywhere, even in Bumflock Egypt.
    If I were to tour the world on a bike, it would have 26" wheels, square taper English BB,
    old school 1" headset, you get the idea.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,025
    I think 26'' might come back for the same reason that vinyl has. Well, apart from the fact that vinyl is actually better!

    There are a lot of young people who actively embrace old technology as a way of sticking the fingers up at the ********s who are trying to tell them what their future should look like.

  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    I think 26'' might come back for the same reason that vinyl has. Well, apart from the fact that vinyl is actually better!

    There are a lot of young people who actively embrace old technology as a way of sticking the fingers up at the ********s who are trying to tell them what their future should look like.
    I have to say I like this post.

  106. #106
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by OlMarin View Post
    Kapusta, in the beginning, nuts decided to name a hill Repack. These nuts started with old 26" 'cruisers', a.k.a. junque. This hill became Repack because you'd have to repack the coaster brake hub after every run.
    That said, the 26" wheel size will never go away. You can get tires everywhere, even in Bumflock Egypt.
    If I were to tour the world on a bike, it would have 26" wheels, square taper English BB,
    old school 1" headset, you get the idea.
    Yes, everyone knows the story of Repack. It also illustrates why 26" became the standard: because it is what they had at hand to work with. And it is mostly just inertia that made it remain that way for all these years.

    But now inertia is behind 27.5 for mid-to upper level mtbs, and every year that trickles down to lower price points.

    No, 26" is not going away altogether (it has other uses), but it is only going to continue to decline in the mtb world. I agree with you on the world tour thing.... but what I (and 99% of riders out there) would want to tour remote regions of Africa with is very different from what we want to hit our local (or even destination) trails with. Seriously, how many rigid, rim braked, 26" bikes with 1" threaded forks do you think have been bought in the past 10 years for the primary purpose of mountain biking?
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  107. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,025
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Seriously, how many rigid, rim braked, 26" bikes with 1" threaded forks do you think have been bought in the past 10 years for the primary purpose of mountain biking?
    Not the point. 1'' steerers and rim-brakes offer no advantage so there is no reason to actively choose them. Rigid bikes do and as a result are still sold today. The same may prove true of 26'' wheels.

  108. #108
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Not the point. 1'' steerers and rim-brakes offer no advantage so there is no reason to actively choose them. Rigid bikes do and as a result are still sold today. The same may prove true of 26'' wheels.
    And you missed my point at well. Look at what I was responding to (what would you tour the world on).
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  109. #109
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    He's just saying you can find these parts in more corners of the world than you can 29 or 27.5 tires, wheels, etc.; disc brake parts, etc. You rip a sidewall in some remote part of Africa, good luck finding a 29er tire but a 26er probably will be available.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  110. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Just thought I'd drop back in here and say how happy I am that this post was appreciated for it's intended purpose and is alive and sparking good opinion and theory mixed with fact and experience.

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    Just thought I'd drop back in here and say how happy I am that this post was appreciated for it's intended purpose and is alive and sparking good opinion and theory mixed with fact and experience.
    By all means. I can see advantages to bigger wheels in general for many reasons. And when you're getting into any particular discipline, get what makes YOU fly. Some of us are poor, but try to keep a decent, general purpose bike under our butts. I can still get in the dirt a bit. I can go on roads. Rain? So?
    BTW this thang's not bad in mud.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  112. #112
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    I've got a very basic rigid bike (Spec HardRock) from '91 that is perfectly functional and was my first mtn bike. Got it when I was 30 y/o or so.
    I have it looking commuter with fenders and skinny tires after I got a Kona hardtail in 2003 and use it for the ease of kid seat set up. I have grandkids these days and the Blackburn rear rack works well with a kid seat that clamps like a vice and can be on/off in less than two minutes. I'm taking the fenders off and bumping up tires to a 2.2 block tread to gain some ride quality. My new plus bike is spoiling me; 27.5 x 3.0.

    In fact, that theme is carrying over to the Kona as well. It works fine and I have no issues with either of my 26" bikes but I'm starting to think I want the ride characteristic's of wider tires so I'm in the process of doing just that.
    As long as I keep the 26'r bikes and maintain them in good ride fashion, I'll be happy to rotate what I ride depending on plans or the areas I get to. Also, these bike are well worth keeping considering they can be back-up or spare bikes for visiting friends or family.
    Here's the commuter look,

    the front wheel cleaned up and a 2.2 put on

    and the Kona with new Schwalbe 2.4 's
    Last edited by bachman1961; 06-17-2017 at 01:10 AM.
    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  113. #113
    CS2
    CS2 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CS2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,942
    G
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    But it is a moot point, because the final demise of 26" has little to do with 29ers or fat bikes. They were never going to replace 26" for a lot of trail riders.

    27.5 is what put the nail in 26's coffin.

    27.5 is the new 26.

    I would not hold my breath for the return of 26" for anything but specialty niches (like dirt jumping and trials).
    There really is very little difference in a 26" or 27.5" when you come down to it.
    A garage full of steel frames means happiness.

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by CS2 View Post
    G
    There really is very little difference in a 26" or 27.5" when you come down to it.
    Then why is everybody condemning a wheel size that will continue to exist longer than most here will be alive? If there's not much difference, why get rid of a perfectly good bike for something newer that isn't 'better'?
    Racing is one thing. Having fun is a whole 'nother
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  115. #115
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    If the hoops are obsolete, I guess you ride what you have or can get because they'd not reasonably or cost effectively replaceable or serviceable (the 26 wheels).
    Yet who says the fun and joy or adventure and challenges of riding a bike are lost? They just changed spec slightly and just like any change or one who has went on to other (newer or different) bikes whence they began, minor adjustments or a tiny learning curve aligned you with the small variations.

    My new bike has done a few things. It fits me better, it feels more forgiving in ride, handling and technical prowess and it serves up more confidence. Better or correct fit shouldn't imply my old bikes are less in any way or 'at fault'. The way the new bike rides and handle is related to some changes and some of that can be brought to the older bikes. Simpler drive train, wider tires, stem changes and wider bars etc...

    Changes I incorporate won't be an attempt to modernize or change character of the earlier trends but more to benefit me in some things I've learned along the way. Improved fit = improved control and handling, some of that with the bigger rubber (adjacent to + size tires) provides hardtail comfort I need 20 or 30 years later.... and any technical prowess the bike has or even just that confidence inspiring attitude makes me feel like a better rider and allows me to stretch my comfort zone some.

    This is why I'll keep my older 2 bikes and use them as creative variations of something different than my newer bike.

    As for the naysayers of 26, they don't really have dog in the fight or could not care less but some of us that keep 26 rolling and well maintained may someday find our wheels and tire collection well worth more than the bikes themselves.
    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BykerMike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    129
    I keep thinking about rebuilding my 26" hardtail. It needs pretty much a new everything lol but it is still mostly functional. I took it for a ride the other day and one thing I noticed that I don't hear mentioned often is that roots don't seem to knock it around as much as my 650b and not nearly as much as my friends 29er. The bike seemed more prone to hop over just about anything rather then trying to roll over. Even when I purposely hit a root sideways the wheels didn't want to kick out as bad.

    Even if I don't rebuild mine, I still think a freshly built 26er will be in my near future... Thinking about an old discounted Lynsky or something...

  117. #117
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by OlMarin View Post
    Then why is everybody condemning a wheel size that will continue to exist longer than most here will be alive? If there's not much difference, why get rid of a perfectly good bike for something newer that isn't 'better'?
    I didn't get rid of mine, I just put some 27" shoes on it!

    26? What's the point??!!-pdrm1491.jpg
    This space intentionally left blank.

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bigjunk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    258
    My 10 year old daughter rides my old BMX bike and she rides it OK but has outgrown it somewhat. I am in no hurry but plan to get her a new bike soon. I will most likely get her a 29er or 27.5'' that she can grow into but I am not against a 26'' because of her being a girl and small. Used 26'' bikes sell fairly cheap for high end bikes a few years old.
    I have not come across a 26'' I like yet mostly because they have been a bit older than I want but I have no problem with one for my daughter.

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    I didn't get rid of mine, I just put some 27" shoes on it!

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PDRM1491.jpg 
Views:	147 
Size:	197.4 KB 
ID:	1143418
    One advantage to disc brakes.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  120. #120
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by CS2 View Post
    G
    There really is very little difference in a 26" or 27.5" when you come down to it.
    Not sure I follow your point.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by bachman1961 View Post
    If the hoops are obsolete, I guess you ride what you have or can get because they'd not reasonably or cost effectively replaceable or serviceable (the 26 wheels).
    As for the naysayers of 26, they don't really have dog in the fight or could not care less but some of us that keep 26 rolling and well maintained may someday find our wheels and tire collection well worth more than the bikes themselves.
    Maybe that's what some people fear? Look, the old 27" road bike size is still out there. Still find wheels, too. But rim and tire selection has gone way down. I'm not even sure if you can get a 27X1 that's reasonably light anymore. I don't think we'll see that any time soon with 26. Just too many out there.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  122. #122
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by OlMarin View Post
    One advantage to disc brakes.
    Those are 26" rims, so they'd work with rim brakes if they had a flat machined sides. 26x2.8" tires have a larger outer diameter which is just a bit bigger than 27".
    This space intentionally left blank.

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by RIDEALL View Post
    Because they are the 125cc 2-Strokes of the MTB world
    Costs keep going up up up for the newest must haves.
    All things being equal, yes some of the virtues of the 27.5 & 29 platforms may help or perform bettering some situations, but at end of day when I'm out on my 26 with a group of people skill and endurance are factors WAY before the bike itself.
    I do get a little nervous at times about availability of the newest designs and quality in tires more then anything.
    And there is that special feeling if you do kill a section, or destroy someone on the newest high dollar machines!
    125cc of the mtb world is a spot on comparison. Quick to accelerate and nimble. Huge fun factor.

  124. #124
    CS2
    CS2 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CS2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,942
    I ride 26 because there aren't any vintage 650B or 700C MTBs.
    A garage full of steel frames means happiness.

  125. #125
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,160
    Quote Originally Posted by CS2 View Post
    I ride 26 because there aren't any vintage 650B or 700C MTBs.
    Thats because you're not looking hard enough...

    GT Tachyon, Diamondback Overdrive...
    All the gear and no idea.

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    843
    There may not be many new frames coming into the market yet (though there are more that are 26+), but there are certainly new components being produced. My wheels are flow mk3's, that weren't available before this past summer. My tires are DHF 26x2.8's, which were just released a few weeks ago.

    I still love the size because of the feel of it and the geo I can create on a bike with it. It's just enough different to make it worthwhile to ride it over a 650b bike. I have built a new bike since 2015 (which was late enough to make it obvious the industry was going 650b). a buddy of mine and I were trading bikes back and forth last week (he rides a nice, modern, vpp 150mm 650b trail bike), and he really enjoyed the pure fun of my 26" hardtail with big, meaty tires. He didn't end up giving it back until we were at the trailhead. I don't anticipate changing wheelsize anytime soon, especially since the rim and tire support is very much still alive.

  127. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    What's the point, I say?

    This is the point:

  128. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by BykerMike View Post
    I keep thinking about rebuilding my 26" hardtail. It needs pretty much a new everything lol but it is still mostly functional. I took it for a ride the other day and one thing I noticed that I don't hear mentioned often is that roots don't seem to knock it around as much as my 650b and not nearly as much as my friends 29er. The bike seemed more prone to hop over just about anything rather then trying to roll over. Even when I purposely hit a root sideways the wheels didn't want to kick out as bad.

    Even if I don't rebuild mine, I still think a freshly built 26er will be in my near future... Thinking about an old discounted Lynsky or something...
    If you find that magic frame, rebuild it fo sho, yo!

    I've built mine 7 different ways since 2008...and each rendition has been fun!!

    Versatile hardtail equally adept at XC, Freeride, all mountain, rigid, 160mm squish, and everything in between.

    Worth the build!

  129. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2

    My 2013 Cove G Spot

    Ride it on the shore,take it to the bike park...26? What's the point??!!-20170611_171935_crop.jpg

  130. #130
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by OlMarin View Post
    Then why is everybody condemning a wheel size that will continue to exist longer than most here will be alive? If there's not much difference, why get rid of a perfectly good bike for something newer that isn't 'better'?
    Racing is one thing. Having fun is a whole 'nother
    Actually there is a significant difference between 26" and 27.5", if you rode both you would quickly know this on rocky trails. I'm sure you know a lot more than I do about everything else in the mountain biking world but you can't argue that 26" tires get stopped 20x as much on rocks and roots, and the 26" bike pedals get scraped up 20x more than on a 27.5". To put it another way: for every time I get hung up on a rock with my 27.5" it would have happened 20 times on my 26" bike. For every time my 27.5 pedal on one side scrapes or brushes against something on the ground, it happens 20 times as much, sometimes violently, on the 26" bike. There is a BIG difference between tire sizes. That extra 0.75 inches of ground clearance has an amazing effect, way more than I could have predicted before actually seeing the difference on the trails between the two bike sizes. Having said that, I still like 26" bikes, I just don't like them as much on rocky trails, that's all. I really like the "grab and go" utility of a 26" bike, I like their nimbleness, quick acceleration, easy to get on/off, etc.

    Now my question is: some people have put on a 27.5 fork on their 26 bike frame to run fatter tires, like 26 x 2.6, etc. But how many people have simply put on a real 27.5 inch tire with a 27.5 fork on a 26 bike and left the rest stock (as in let the rear tire stay as 26 inch)? Is it doable? Is it too much of an upright seating position now? Harder to pedal up hills? But better down hills with the bigger tire?

  131. #131
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    Actually there is a significant difference between 26" and 27.5", if you rode both you would quickly know this on rocky trails. I'm sure you know a lot more than I do about everything else in the mountain biking world but you can't argue that 26" tires get stopped 20x as much on rocks and roots, and the 26" bike pedals get scraped up 20x more than on a 27.5". To put it another way: for every time I get hung up on a rock with my 27.5" it would have happened 20 times on my 26" bike. For every time my 27.5 pedal on one side scrapes or brushes against something on the ground, it happens 20 times as much, sometimes violently, on the 26" bike. There is a BIG difference between tire sizes. That extra 0.75 inches of ground clearance has an amazing effect, way more than I could have predicted before actually seeing the difference on the trails between the two bike sizes. Having said that, I still like 26" bikes, I just don't like them as much on rocky trails, that's all. I really like the "grab and go" utility of a 26" bike, I like their nimbleness, quick acceleration, easy to get on/off, etc.
    I assumed at first that this post was sarcasm, but now I am not so sure.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  132. #132
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    I assumed at first that this post was sarcasm, but now I am not so sure.
    LOL it's not sarcasm. First of all, could I ask that everyone be OBJECTIVE about the strengths and weaknesses of a 26" tire, and not have a tribal "Us vs. Them" attitude. Is it really so hard to admit that a 26" tire underperforms on rocky trails compared with larger tire sizes? Am I a counselor in some 12-step program gently trying to tell people to accept the truth? Now this sounds like sarcasm, but I'm just trying to get my point across. Having said that, I could have bought a 2nd cheap 27.5" bike as a backup to my main 27.5", but I instead chose to purchase (again) essentially the identical 26" bike I had before as a backup bike to the 27.5". If I didn't like 26" bikes I would not have bought one again. That is not sarcasm. That means I like a lot of things about the 26" bike. 90% of the time they perform just fine. It's that 10% on the tough parts of the trails that they underperform. Does that mean they should be banished forever from the mountain bike world? No. 26" tires will always have a place in the mountain bike world. But you can't turn water into wine. You can't increase the angle of rock/obstacle clearance enough with a 26" tire relative to the larger tires. It's sad but it's a simple fact.

  133. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Rich, I have no doubt you're correct. However many are perfectly happy with 26". I'm one. If/when new bike time comes 27.5 will not be ruled out, specially with the veritable plethora of tires available for this size. It may even become a priority when I shop.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  134. #134
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079

    26? What's the point??!!

    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    LOL it's not sarcasm. First of all, could I ask that everyone be OBJECTIVE about the strengths and weaknesses of a 26" tire, and not have a tribal "Us vs. Them" attitude. Is it really so hard to admit that a 26" tire underperforms on rocky trails compared with larger tire sizes? Am I a counselor in some 12-step program gently trying to tell people to accept the truth? Now this sounds like sarcasm, but I'm just trying to get my point across. Having said that, I could have bought a 2nd cheap 27.5" bike as a backup to my main 27.5", but I instead chose to purchase (again) essentially the identical 26" bike I had before as a backup bike to the 27.5". If I didn't like 26" bikes I would not have bought one again. That is not sarcasm. That means I like a lot of things about the 26" bike. 90% of the time they perform just fine. It's that 10% on the tough parts of the trails that they underperform. Does that mean they should be banished forever from the mountain bike world? No. 26" tires will always have a place in the mountain bike world. But you can't turn water into wine. You can't increase the angle of rock/obstacle clearance enough with a 26" tire relative to the larger tires. It's sad but it's a simple fact.
    If you read my previous posts on this thread you would know that I do in fact think that 27.5 is an overall improvement over 26.

    My issue is that for someone as preachy as you are being, you should get your info straight.

    For example, pedal strikes have nothing to do with the wheel size (unless you are talking about sticking a 27.5" wheel on a 26" frame and fork). Bottom bracket heights are just whatever the frame designer wants them to be, and there is no trend towards designing BBs higher for 27.5 than for 26.

    Second, you are so ridiculously over the top with your claim of 26" tires getting stopped 20X as much as 27.5" ones, so as to make it seem to me that you were being sarcastic. I ride very rocky trails on a 26er and 29er, and even the 29er is not 20X better in this regard. It is clearly better, but not 20X better. The difference with 27.5 is there, but it is subtle. Definitely an improvement (which is why I will eventually go 27.5), but your wildly exaggerated claim, combined with your totally bogus one regarding pedal strikes, makes it hard to take what you are saying seriously.
    Last edited by kapusta; 07-10-2017 at 08:35 AM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  135. #135
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Geometry and frame design have way more influence on how a bike handles/rolls over things than wheel size.
    This space intentionally left blank.

  136. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jack Burns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,876
    16.068883707497264
    25.999999999999996<<<
    42.068883707497264

    These numbers, above correspond. 16" is my frame size. 26" are the wheels. 42" is the wheelbase.

    These numbers are close to exact in the Fibonacci sequence.

    It just happens I feel good on these hard tail frames with these numbers.

    42 and 26 are very close to the Golden Mean, in ratio.

    I just looked into this because I have been hanging pictures on the wall, and decided to try using a little sacred geometry on the projects.

    It occurred to me to see what is going on with the hard tail rigid single speed mountain bikes I love to ride in terms of Phi.

    I'm blown away by the coincidence.

    Sure, it can be debunked.

    But now I am going to think a bit more about stems, handle bar length and sweep in these terms, and see what comes of this.

    I used to have a 29er, but I can't measure it anymore. I have a full suspension bike I can measure too. I would probably have to take the sagged geometry measurements to get a good number.

    26 x 1.61 = 41.86

    Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

  137. #137
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    btw, despite the math, the difference in the radius of a 27.5 and a 26 wheel is actually only 1/2", not 3/4". Check the actual metric dims of the wheel itself, subtract the difference and divide by two. It's mostly marketing.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  138. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,398
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    a 26" tire underperforms on rocky trails compared with larger tire sizes
    Depends on how many tight switchbacks there are (really a function of wheelbase, but bigger wheels increase the wheelbase)

  139. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,025
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Second, you are so ridiculously over the top with your claim of 26" tires getting stopped 20X as much as 27.5" ones, so as to make it seem to me that you were being sarcastic.
    Have to say, that is a crazy number. No way such a small difference in diameter could make such a huge difference.

    What we need is dropper-wheels. 26'' most of the time for fun then pop up to 29er at the press of a button for bumping over those pesky rocks.

  140. #140
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,160
    hmmm, I own both 27.5 and 26 and don't find it 20x better at anything, in fact I'd say Zero X better, only thing it is better at is that i could actually buy it as I didn't want to go 29er.
    All the gear and no idea.

  141. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    185
    Because...F you! that's why! ha ha. I have 26'rs because I rode them when I was "younger". When I got into mountain bikes, they were all that were available. My my "heros" were on 26's. Now, I am older, and I am starting to collect old school SPECIALIZED bikes, I have my 96 hopper, and I am starting to gather older stuff...2000 and before. Kleins, Old yeti arc, giant carbons etc are on my hunting list as well. Whatever cool old stuff and parts I can find from the golden years of MTB bikes!

  142. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,025
    I don't think 29er bikes will ever be cool. No matter what. Ever.

  143. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    If you find that magic frame, rebuild it fo sho, yo!

    I've built mine 7 different ways since 2008...and each rendition has been fun!!

    Versatile hardtail equally adept at XC, Freeride, all mountain, rigid, 160mm squish, and everything in between.

    Worth the build!
    I don't feel like the Lone Ranger now. Mentioned earlier I've had OlMarin now for 25 years. It just fits. And I haven't been able to make the B/B shell oblong yet. Frame's still good in spite of the bazillion miles on it.
    DAMN THE MUD, FULL SPEED AHEAD!!

  144. #144
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    I don't think 29er bikes will ever be cool. No matter what. Ever.
    You just haven't ridden a good one yet. On mine I forget about the wagon wheels once I'm in the saddle, yee-haw!
    This space intentionally left blank.

  145. #145
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    You just haven't ridden a good one yet. On mine I forget about the wagon wheels once I'm in the saddle, yee-haw!
    Still not cool.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  146. #146
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Still not cool.
    Not even a little bit?
    This space intentionally left blank.

  147. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    185
    All bikes are cool.....that's the cool thing about them!

  148. #148
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    Not even a little bit?
    No.

    They are the elastic waist pants of wheel sizes.

    Comfortable, practical, arguably superior, no logical reason to avoid them, and some day you WILL break down and get them.... but totally uncool.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  149. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,460
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Not sure I follow your point.
    Measure the outside diameter of a 27.5 with a 2.1 race slick on it versus 26 x2.5 tire? Going to be close.

  150. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    I don't think 29er bikes will ever be cool. No matter what. Ever.
    Until you stop doing endos through rock gardens cuz 29ers roll great in the chunk. Plus @ 6'4" I don't look like I'm a clown on those tiny bikes at the circus. I'll settle for less goofy?

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,568
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    No.

    They are the elastic waist pants of wheel sizes.

    Comfortable, practical, arguably superior, no logical reason to avoid them, and some day you WILL break down and get them.... but totally uncool.
    Perfect match for my Velcro sneakers.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  152. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    Geometry and frame design have way more influence on how a bike handles/rolls over things than wheel size.
    Unless the wheels are 3" bigger. Math and such ya know.

  153. #153
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Unless the wheels are 3" bigger. Math and such ya know.
    It's actually closer to 2". I have a 26" wheel that measures 26.75" and a 29" wheel that is a hair over 29", both wheels have 2.4" Chunky Monkeys.

    While the 29" wheel will technically roll over obstacles better than a 26" wheel, geometry plays a more important role in how the bike goes over obstacles. A 26" downhill bike should go over obstacles better than a 700c road bike, no?
    This space intentionally left blank.

  154. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    It's actually closer to 2". I have a 26" wheel that measures 26.75" and a 29" wheel that is a hair over 29", both wheels have 2.4" Chunky Monkeys.

    While the 29" wheel will technically roll over obstacles better than a 26" wheel, geometry plays a more important role in how the bike goes over obstacles. A 26" downhill bike should go over obstacles better than a 700c road bike, no?

    You realize they are racing 29" DH bikes now right? Like killing it on them, taking podiums.
    I like to fart when I'm in front of you on a climb:skep:

  155. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    there is no trend towards designing BBs higher for 27.5 than for 26
    And isn't it very common to see the 27.5" frame with a lower BB height than a 26"? Usually stated as being done for more stability due to a lower BB height? For example, the 2015 Chromag Stylus 26er has a BB height of 12.9" / 328mm while the 2017 Chromag Stylus 27.5 has a BB height of 12.6" / 319mm. 9mm lower on the 27.5 frame.

  156. #156
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtrider76 View Post
    You realize they are racing 29" DH bikes now right? Like killing it on them, taking podiums.
    Yes.
    This space intentionally left blank.

  157. #157
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079

    26? What's the point??!!

    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Measure the outside diameter of a 27.5 with a 2.1 race slick on it versus 26 x2.5 tire? Going to be close.
    So?

    That's like saying a short guy on stilts is the same height as a tall guy with flat shoes.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  158. #158
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    So?

    That's like saying a short guy on stilts is the same height as a tall guy with flat shoes.
    Now I'm picturing these guys in elastic waist pants and Velcro shoes.
    This space intentionally left blank.

  159. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    31
    I have just ridden 18 miles at Freedom Park in Williamsburg VA. I am still using my massively upgraded 1999 GT I-Drive. Not only was it a ton of fun but the 2 friends I was with who have a 29er and 27.5er were thoroughly impressed with my old 26er's capabilities.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

  160. #160
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Measure the outside diameter of a 27.5 with a 2.1 race slick on it versus 26 x2.5 tire? Going to be close.
    I'm going to try a 26 x 2.4 inch tire later on the front, I'm only doing a Kenda 1.95 inch in the front right now and it can struggle on rocky stuff downhill. As for 29" bikes being cool, the coolest bikes are the most underrated bikes, so by that rationale 26" bikes are now cooler and will continue to get cooler. Again, not to change the subject twice but has anyone tried to put on a 27.5" fork and a 27.5" tire on a 26" bike and leave the back 26" tire stock? I assume if no response, the answer is no, it's impossible or it just doesn't work off road.

  161. #161
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    It will would work, if all the parts involved jibe together.
    This space intentionally left blank.

  162. #162
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    Have to say, that is a crazy number. No way such a small difference in diameter could make such a huge difference.

    What we need is dropper-wheels. 26'' most of the time for fun then pop up to 29er at the press of a button for bumping over those pesky rocks.
    I'll take a picture of my 27.5" pedals (the most worn one on the right side) and then show you the 26" pedal as comparison. Keep in mind the 26" ones are more metallic and the 27.5" ones are resin, and were ridden almost daily for 3 months vs. the 26" pedal that was used the equivalent of 4 months if that makes a difference in your judgment. I obviously don't count how many times my 26" pedals scrape but it's at least 10x as much. The pictures should tell 1000 words on how much more the 26" pedals scrape compared to the 27.5". And no, this is not a marketing ploy, I don't work for a 27.5" manufacturer...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 26? What's the point??!!-0710172017-2-.jpg  

    26? What's the point??!!-0422172252.jpg  


  163. #163
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    I'll take a picture of my 27.5" pedals (the most worn one on the right side) and then show you the 26" pedal as comparison. Keep in mind the 26" ones are more metallic and the 27.5" ones are resin, and were ridden almost daily for 3 months vs. the 26" pedal that was used the equivalent of 4 months if that makes a difference in your judgment. I obviously don't count how many times my 26" pedals scrape but it's at least 10x as much. The pictures should tell 1000 words on how much more the 26" pedals scrape compared to the 27.5". And no, this is not a marketing ploy, I don't work for a 27.5" manufacturer...
    They are different bikes, different geometry. BB clearance isn't specific to wheel size. Could also be different crank lengths.

    And if you put a 27.5 fork/tire on a 26er, you may be putting more stress on the head tube than it was designed for.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  164. #164
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,160
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    I'll take a picture of my 27.5" pedals (the most worn one on the right side) and then show you the 26" pedal as comparison. Keep in mind the 26" ones are more metallic and the 27.5" ones are resin, and were ridden almost daily for 3 months vs. the 26" pedal that was used the equivalent of 4 months if that makes a difference in your judgment. I obviously don't count how many times my 26" pedals scrape but it's at least 10x as much. The pictures should tell 1000 words on how much more the 26" pedals scrape compared to the 27.5". And no, this is not a marketing ploy, I don't work for a 27.5" manufacturer...
    I find that i get noticeably more peddle strikes with my 27.5 bike over my 26 bike(s), so umm... everybody's experience may vary
    All the gear and no idea.

  165. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,048
    Quote Originally Posted by tjchad View Post
    And isn't it very common to see the 27.5" frame with a lower BB height than a 26"? Usually stated as being done for more stability due to a lower BB height? For example, the 2015 Chromag Stylus 26er has a BB height of 12.9" / 328mm while the 2017 Chromag Stylus 27.5 has a BB height of 12.6" / 319mm. 9mm lower on the 27.5 frame.
    That's because geometry is gravitating towards longer, lower, and slacker. Your 27.5 is newer, hence the "updated" geometry.

  166. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Cornfield View Post
    It's actually closer to 2". I have a 26" wheel that measures 26.75" and a 29" wheel that is a hair over 29", both wheels have 2.4" Chunky Monkeys.

    While the 29" wheel will technically roll over obstacles better than a 26" wheel, geometry plays a more important role in how the bike goes over obstacles. A 26" downhill bike should go over obstacles better than a 700c road bike, no?
    More because of suspension than geometry. If you lock out the suspension on the downhill bike, put on comparable tires on both bikes, and get your weight in the right spot over the bike, the road bike will roll over obstacles better than a 26" downhill bike. You would have to get your weight back a fair bit, and the shorter wheelbase would definitely make things a bit dicey, but for rolloverability, bigger wheels will win.

  167. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by ehosey2 View Post
    I have just ridden 18 miles at Freedom Park in Williamsburg VA. I am still using my massively upgraded 1999 GT I-Drive. Not only was it a ton of fun but the 2 friends I was with who have a 29er and 27.5er were thoroughly impressed with my old 26er's capabilities.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
    Wheel size does not make up for rider ability....That has been proven time and time again!

  168. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Adams View Post
    Wheel size does not make up for rider ability....That has been proven time and time again!
    Wheel size with proper geometry can absolutely make up for limited riding ability in certain circumstances.

  169. #169
    Pipe Dreamer
    Reputation: Cornfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,321
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    More because of suspension than geometry. If you lock out the suspension on the downhill bike, put on comparable tires on both bikes, and get your weight in the right spot over the bike, the road bike will roll over obstacles better than a 26" downhill bike. You would have to get your weight back a fair bit, and the shorter wheelbase would definitely make things a bit dicey, but for rolloverability, bigger wheels will win.
    Yes, there's more to a bike than just wheel size, and that was the point I was trying to make. Wheel size, geometry, suspension, and even tire width all make a bike more or less capable.
    This space intentionally left blank.

  170. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    Wheel size with proper geometry can absolutely make up for limited riding ability in certain circumstances.
    I'm sorry, but a shitty rider on 29's will still be far behind me on my 26r. Sorry! 29's does not make you jesus on bike. Just masks your inabilities a tiny amount!

  171. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Adams View Post
    I'm sorry, but a shitty rider on 29's will still be far behind me on my 26r. Sorry! 29's does not make you jesus on bike. Just masks your inabilities a tiny amount!
    But a rider with slightly less ability than you will gain time on a rough trail with bigger wheels. For the top riders in the world, wheel size could mean the difference between winning and being off the podium. For the average rider, it could mean the difference between clearing a section and walking it.

  172. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Adams View Post
    I'm sorry, but a shitty rider on 29's will still be far behind me on my 26r. Sorry! 29's does not make you jesus on bike. Just masks your inabilities a tiny amount!
    You're missing the point, I think. Your statement is obvious, but a little short-sighted.

    A crappy rider will ride a technical trail better on a 27.5+ than a 26x2.3 because of the gain in traction and ability to roll over what would cause a 26" rider to use some skill.

    So yes, "Wheel size with proper geometry can absolutely make up for limited riding ability IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES."

    That person wasn't comparing a beginner to an expert. He was saying that an advantage in technology will benefit a rider in general. That's an obvious statement as well though.

  173. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Pig View Post
    I don't think 29er bikes will ever be cool. No matter what. Ever.
    Quote Originally Posted by leeboh View Post
    Until you stop doing endos through rock gardens cuz 29ers roll great in the chunk. Plus @ 6'4" I don't look like I'm a clown on those tiny bikes at the circus. I'll settle for less goofy?
    In my opinion, the Trek Stache is very cool. The Kona Honzo is cool. The DB Mason is cool. There are several other duallies that are equally gnarbeans 29'ers that are cool, but I don't follow duallies anymore. I'm a hardtail guy.

    Anyhoo...the 6'+ riders benefit from a larger bike in chunky circumstances. I've got local trails here that my 26x2.4 falls right into and a Stache glides right across. I have to use more energy to accomplish the same feat. I mean, we're talking a difference of at least 4" on this, so terrain specific design does make sense.

    26" is fun, snappy, quick, etc...but in a trail network riddled with softball-basketball sized rocks and rock formation after rock formation...large hoops will no-doubt have an advantage unless it's a more gravity oriented trail that you can hop and bounce over everything.

    My local trails are very pedally. No extended climbing, no extended DH...thus I need to pedal over all that chunk. It's a real chore on a 26" hardtail. It's a real dream on a Honzo or Stache.


    I used to think there was no benefit for large hoops that I couldn't overcome with some hard work, but then I moved to another region where the trails were completely different than what I was used to. My eyes were closed because of my ignorance to what else is out there. Now that I'm riding other things...I now know that my own little world has no bearing on the rest of the world and it's useless to argue the point most of the time.


    26'er holdout's can be the most egocentric bikers. Puffing out their chest and saying they can annihilate all of their wagon-wheeled riding buddies. Not that they can't...but they're only using what works for them in their region. Move to another region and ride with another egocentric wagon-wheeler and they'll clean your clock.


    That said...I'm still riding 26x2.4" freeride hardtail and enjoying it because I can't afford to buy a new bike.

  174. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,568
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    A crappy rider will ride a technical trail better on a 27.5+ than a 26x2.3 because of the gain in traction and ability to roll over what would cause a 26" rider to use some skill.."
    Of course, this is less and less noticeable the bigger the obstacles get, and once you're above axle height, it's barely relevant.
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  175. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    Of course, this is less and less noticeable the bigger the obstacles get, and once you're above axle height, it's barely relevant.
    Absolutely! Couldn't agree with you more...but we must open our eyes to the thought that rider-"A" might have to roll over successive 4"-8" rock and structure for the majority of their trail. I've got trails like that all over my region.

    Rider-"B" is rolling trails that are like 3-feet wide and full of gnarly structures to jump and hop...but no real "speed-bumps". Just flow-jump to flow-drop, rock shelf to rock shelf. Bunnyhopping over a log with momentum to clear it versus Rider-A who has to actually pedal across miles of log-high bumps the whole time.

    Like I said earlier, I cut my teeth on some climby but somewhat-smooth trails that had jumps, drops, and log crossings. Then I moved to where I am now where a Stumpy FSR 29'er is probably the prime bike for the job, except for the fact that I love hardtails...so the Stache or Honzo etc...is perfect.

  176. #176
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    You're missing the point, I think. Your statement is obvious, but a little short-sighted.

    A crappy rider will ride a technical trail better on a 27.5+ than a 26x2.3 because of the gain in traction and ability to roll over what would cause a 26" rider to use some skill.

    So yes, "Wheel size with proper geometry can absolutely make up for limited riding ability IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES."

    That person wasn't comparing a beginner to an expert. He was saying that an advantage in technology will benefit a rider in general. That's an obvious statement as well though.
    As a beginner and so-called "crappy rider" you can use me for (or against) your arguments: how the heck would a beginner like me know quickly that a 27.5" is better over obstacles and 1/2 of you guys don't know this!?! I didn't learn it from some advertisement or other info. online, I learned it by riding both wheel sizes. And I've had two pretty different 27.5"s and they both cleared obstacles better. One was a bare-bones $150 Walmart with a lot of other problems but clearing obstacles was not one of them. After I threw that bike in the trash (broken derailleur, no hanger), I preferred the $350 26" for riding but still wanted to get another 27.5". It was only after I went from a (cheap) 27.5" BACK to a 26" that I really noticed a difference in clearing rocks, etc. You can argue bike improvements, geometry, etc. but all I know is that the two 27.5"s I've had are good for clearance, and the several 26"s I've had were not.

    Here is the 2nd (gearing) issue: in one of my favorite areas in the county to go mountain biking, I have a Facebook blog about all of the different dirt roads and trails in the area. When I have time I'm going to categorize the trails according to beginner, cross-country, and all-mountain. Why? Because it's not just the experience and talent level of the mountain biker, it's what kind of bike they are actually bringing to this specific area that counts a lot for where they should go.

    I've noticed that gearing can be even more important on the all-mountain trails; my 3x8 cassette simply cannot handle the up and down rollercoaster all-mountain trails. I could have a 29" tire and still not be able to do those trails without the right gearing, as in I have 11-30t and I would need at least a 42t for the lowest gear. A talented person on an all-mountain trail with a 29" bike still may be hampered by older gearing. So if a rider sees my Facebook trail list and they have a 3x7 or 3x8 drivetrain, they can do the beginner and XC but they know that the all-mountain trails are going to be more of a chore than they are worth. For the XC (intermediate) trails, I recommend a larger tire but it's still doable with a 26". Rocks on the XC trails can be annoying on a 26" and can slow you down, but it's still doable without getting off the bike a bunch of times. Again, for all-mountain it's gearing first, everything else 2nd, including tire size (at least in this area). You could have the best shocks and the best 29" tires but if you don't have modern gearing you are going to need to get off the bike several times on the trail (like I have to do with the 27.5" and a 3x8 drivetrain). Bottom line: this is just from a beginner, but it appears to me that beginner and XC trails favor the experienced, talented biker no matter what they ride, but the tougher the trail, the more bike you are going to need regardless of your skill level. It's a curve where tougher, all-mountain trails on the far end is proportional to the level (cost and quality) of bike needed.

  177. #177
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,160
    you're still joking right? "old gearing"doesn't mean you can't ride stuff. There's nothing I can ride on my new bike that I can't ride on my old bike due to gearing, in fact my old bike has a wider range. The only thing stopping me from riding stuff is fitness and skill, it sure as hell isnt gearing...or tyre size (or even suspension)
    All the gear and no idea.

  178. #178
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    I'll take a picture of my 27.5" pedals (the most worn one on the right side) and then show you the 26" pedal as comparison. Keep in mind the 26" ones are more metallic and the 27.5" ones are resin, and were ridden almost daily for 3 months vs. the 26" pedal that was used the equivalent of 4 months if that makes a difference in your judgment. I obviously don't count how many times my 26" pedals scrape but it's at least 10x as much. The pictures should tell 1000 words on how much more the 26" pedals scrape compared to the 27.5". And no, this is not a marketing ploy, I don't work for a 27.5" manufacturer...
    Have you also concluded from this that 26ers are more red than 27.5?

    I mean, your pictures clearly prove it.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  179. #179
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079

    26? What's the point??!!

    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    I find that i get noticeably more peddle strikes with my 27.5 bike over my 26 bike(s), so umm... everybody's experience may vary
    Experiences vary because the bikes do.

    You have extrapolated a sample of 1 27.5 bike to all 27.5 bikes.

    This is like me claiming that 29ers have narrower handlebars than 26ers, because MY 29er has a narrower bar than my 26er.

    Edit: Sorry, I got confused and thought you were the other poster, and therefore misses your point. Please disregard this.
    Last edited by kapusta; 07-12-2017 at 03:38 AM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  180. #180
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,160
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Experiences vary because the bikes do.

    You have extrapolated a sample of 1 27.5 bike to all 27.5 bikes.

    This is like me claiming that 29ers have narrower handlebars than 26ers, because MY 29er has a narrower bar than my 26er.
    No, your point is exactly the point I was trying to make compared to this other guy who says that 26 pedal strike 20x more than 27.5. Im not extrapolating to anything.
    All the gear and no idea.

  181. #181
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    Well, why not get a 29er then, should get something like 40x less stoppage due to rockage.

    I don't find my 26er less capable than my 29er.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  182. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    You're missing the point, I think. Your statement is obvious, but a little short-sighted.

    A crappy rider will ride a technical trail better on a 27.5+ than a 26x2.3 because of the gain in traction and ability to roll over what would cause a 26" rider to use some skill.

    So yes, "Wheel size with proper geometry can absolutely make up for limited riding ability IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES."

    That person wasn't comparing a beginner to an expert. He was saying that an advantage in technology will benefit a rider in general. That's an obvious statement as well though.
    Agreed.

    I am just on the side of "Just because it's a 26r, it's garbage, slow, and useless" is a total lie camp. My old specialized with 26's on it is like a Ferrari compared to some 29rs I have ridden. There's more to it than wheel size. Again, rider capability comes into it as well. I have been riding 2 wheeled things both motorized and not since I was 6, I am now 40. And Youngin's on their fancy dangled 29rs still choke on my dust. OH, Another thing, I am not against....not by a long shot...27.5/29/fat bikes etc. This year there will be loads of all of them in my garage. plus some 24's for my son.

    I love EVERYTHING on 2 wheels...from 26 to 700c and beyond. Its ALL good.

  183. #183
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    No, your point is exactly the point I was trying to make compared to this other guy who says that 26 pedal strike 20x more than 27.5. Im not extrapolating to anything.
    Sorry, I got you mixed up with the other guy, and therefore misinterpreted your point.

    My bad.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  184. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by steve adams View Post
    agreed.

    I am just on the side of "just because it's a 26r, it's garbage, slow, and useless" is a total lie camp.
    +1k

  185. #185
    Bikes in jeans
    Reputation: jestep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,137
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    I've noticed that gearing can be even more important on the all-mountain trails; my 3x8 cassette simply cannot handle the up and down rollercoaster all-mountain trails.
    This doesn't make any sense. 1x 2x 3x it's all irrelevant, the range of gears you have available is simply a matter of mathematics. If you're talking about easier due to sequential shifting that's one thing, but you can have the same range no matter how many cogs you have up front.
    WTB: Med Bontrager Ti Lite, PM Me...

  186. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Have you also concluded from this that 26ers are more red than 27.5?

    I mean, your pictures clearly prove it.


    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Experiences vary because the bikes do.

    You have extrapolated a sample of 1 27.5 bike to all 27.5 bikes.

    This is like me claiming that 29ers have narrower handlebars than 26ers, because MY 29er has a narrower bar than my 26er.

    Edit: Sorry, I got confused and thought you were the other poster, and therefore misses your point. Please disregard this.
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    No, your point is exactly the point I was trying to make compared to this other guy who says that 26 pedal strike 20x more than 27.5. Im not extrapolating to anything.
    Pedal strikes will be more affected by the geometry of the frame in conjunction with the fork A2C. (as somewhat stated)

    My 26'er hardtail has a higher static bottom bracket than many 27.5 and 29er bikes these days.

    The "fad" seems to be longer and lower now because "marketing" sees all of the trails that "we all ride" on youtube...you know...the ultra-groomed flow trails that exist in every city on the planet?

    It's not like any of us have to go "monster-trucking" through the chunk or anything.

  187. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,568
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    As a beginner and so-called "crappy rider" you can use me for (or against) your arguments: how the heck would a beginner like me know quickly that a 27.5" is better over obstacles and 1/2 of you guys don't know this!?!
    You don't 'know' what you think you 'know'.
    It's part of being a beginner.

    Bottom bracket height isn't dictated by wheel size.

    Many bikes with 'new gearing' have less range than bikes with 'old' gearing.

    Equipment is nowhere near as important as you think it is wrt to what terrain can be ridden; there are lots of folks riding 26" rigid singlespeeds that will be happy to prove this to you on any trail you choose (if you can manage to keep them in sight for more than a couple minutes).

    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  188. #188
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    You don't 'know' what you think you 'know'.
    It's part of being a beginner.
    THIS^^^

    Bottom bracket height isn't dictated by wheel size.
    And this^^^^ (for the 10th+ time in this thread)
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  189. #189
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    They are different bikes, different geometry. BB clearance isn't specific to wheel size. Could also be different crank lengths.

    And if you put a 27.5 fork/tire on a 26er, you may be putting more stress on the head tube than it was designed for.
    I'm going to back track on the 27.5 fork; as mentioned, there is very little difference between a 26 and a 27.5 and most bikes are fine with a fork with a bit more travel so I doubt there would be any issue.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  190. #190
    Flappity flappity flap
    Reputation: Zowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by chelboed View Post
    Absolutely! Couldn't agree with you more...but we must open our eyes to the thought that rider-"A" might have to roll over successive 4"-8" rock and structure for the majority of their trail. I've got trails like that all over my region.

    Rider-"B" is rolling trails that are like 3-feet wide and full of gnarly structures to jump and hop...but no real "speed-bumps". Just flow-jump to flow-drop, rock shelf to rock shelf. Bunnyhopping over a log with momentum to clear it versus Rider-A who has to actually pedal across miles of log-high bumps the whole time.

    Like I said earlier, I cut my teeth on some climby but somewhat-smooth trails that had jumps, drops, and log crossings. Then I moved to where I am now where a Stumpy FSR 29'er is probably the prime bike for the job, except for the fact that I love hardtails...so the Stache or Honzo etc...is perfect.
    That's some magic there.

    It's intriguing that all you need for continuous successive 8" square edge rocks is a pair of 29" wheels. Never got my 29er pedalling through stuff like that, considering it would basically be scraping my bash guard, and always thought smaller wheels pumping kept more momentum easily, but that's based on actual riding.

    Then again, I ride more than I read, maybe I haven't read the magic words yet...
    Last edited by Zowie; 07-12-2017 at 01:37 PM.

  191. #191
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by slapheadmofo View Post
    You don't 'know' what you think you 'know'.
    It's part of being a beginner.

    Bottom bracket height isn't dictated by wheel size.

    Many bikes with 'new gearing' have less range than bikes with 'old' gearing.

    Equipment is nowhere near as important as you think it is wrt to what terrain can be ridden; there are lots of folks riding 26" rigid singlespeeds that will be happy to prove this to you on any trail you choose (if you can manage to keep them in sight for more than a couple minutes).

    OK, so why is the trend toward 1x11 and 1x12 that have 10-42t or 10-46t cassettes? The older 7-speed freewheels are generally 14-28t, and it's hard to even get up to 34t, there is only one left that I can find (Shimano) and people say it doesn't even thread on correctly, it wobbles. I'm looking at an 11-30t freewheel but again that simply will not climb steep inclines, period. The back tire will start slipping and the bike will stop and fall over. So if you state that a lot of older bikes have more range, then why is modern gearing is spaced wider at 10-42/46t instead of the older 14-28t? I don't understand your math, explain please...

    There is a canyon close to my home that has bike access on both sides. A couple of months ago I was riding on the more flat side (dirt/pressed gravel road) and saw a group of riders coming back on the other side of the canyon, the same direction as me. We meet at the end at the parking lot. They were all riding better bikes. My side of the canyon is easy, I never had to get off the bike, and all other things being equal, should blow them away, because I'm on a relatively flat road and they are on a trail that dips and climbs twice, about 40 feet once and 100 feet the 2nd time. The fastest guys actually beat me back to the parking lot. It was very impressive to see actually. That's when I knew that modern gearing is a quantum leap above 3x7 or 3x8 gearing. They obviously had better gearing to climb the two inclines. The other guys in the group struggled up the two inclines. There was a dramatic separation in the group after the two inclines; the wide-geared bikes just destroyed the lesser bikes (I don't know what the lesser bikes had, I admit, maybe it was 2x10 or 3x9, etc). You could argue the fastest riders just pedaled the hardest, but it looked to me that everyone put in the same amount of energy going up the inclines, in fact the guys at the back looked like they were putting even more energy into pedaling than the front guys. No one that I remember had to get off the bike on either incline (like I have to with 11-30t gearing) but some in the back of the pack were trying desperately to stay on the bike while they were going slow, I guess out of embarrassment. The front guys made it look easy, their bikes made them look like pros in a competition. How could they not have better gearing? Are you saying that the 1x11 and 1x12 gearing doesn't help with inclines???

  192. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,568
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    OK, so why is the trend toward 1x11 and 1x12 that have 10-42t or 10-46t cassettes? The older 7-speed freewheels are generally 14-28t, and it's hard to even get up to 34t, there is only one left that I can find (Shimano) and people say it doesn't even thread on correctly, it wobbles. I'm looking at an 11-30t freewheel but again that simply will not climb steep inclines, period. The back tire will start slipping and the bike will stop and fall over. So if you state that a lot of older bikes have more range, then why is modern gearing is spaced wider at 10-42/46t instead of the older 14-28t? I don't understand your math, explain please...

    There is a canyon close to my home that has bike access on both sides. A couple of months ago I was riding on the more flat side (dirt/pressed gravel road) and saw a group of riders coming back on the other side of the canyon, the same direction as me. We meet at the end at the parking lot. They were all riding better bikes. My side of the canyon is easy, I never had to get off the bike, and all other things being equal, should blow them away, because I'm on a relatively flat road and they are on a trail that dips and climbs twice, about 40 feet once and 100 feet the 2nd time. The fastest guys actually beat me back to the parking lot. It was very impressive to see actually. They obviously had better gearing to climb the two inclines. The other guys in the group struggled up the two inclines. There was a dramatic separation in the group after the two inclines; the wide-geared bikes just destroyed the lesser bikes. You could say the fastest riders just pedaled the hardest, but it looked to me that everyone put in the same amount of energy going up the inclines, in fact the guys at the back looked like they were putting even more energy into pedaling than the front guys. The front guys made it look easy, their bikes made them look like pros in a competition. How could they not have better gearing? Are you saying that the 1x11 and 1x12 gearing doesn't help with inclines???
    My head hurts.

    It had nothing to do with gears. It never does.
    If you switched bikes with the fast guys, they would still be faster then you.
    You could have 700 gears on your bike and a strong rider with only 1 gear will crush you. He/she will also ride up and down things in that one gear that you will not. Fast riders are fast. That's how it is, has always been, and will be forever. Amen.

    Also, you do realize what the "3" in "3x7" or "3x8" stands for, yes? Because you seem to be completely ignoring the fact that front derailleurs do in fact exist and can be used to move the chain between chainrings. Once you account for this, hopefully everything will become clear.

    If not, well...you can lead a horse to water...
    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  193. #193
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    OK, so why is the trend toward 1x11 and 1x12 that have 10-42t or 10-46t cassettes? The older 7-speed freewheels are generally 14-28t, and it's hard to even get up to 34t, there is only one left that I can find (Shimano) and people say it doesn't even thread on correctly, it wobbles. I'm looking at an 11-30t freewheel but again that simply will not climb steep inclines, period. The back tire will start slipping and the bike will stop and fall over. So if you state that a lot of older bikes have more range, then why is modern gearing is spaced wider at 10-42/46t instead of the older 14-28t? I don't understand your math, explain please...
    Older drivetrains were usually 2 or three chain-rings rings in the front. That extends the gearing range. The new wide-range cassettes are to (partially) compensate for that.

    Think of an typical older 3x8 drivetrain with 22/32/44 in the front and an 11-30 cassette in the rear (BTW, that is REAL old, 11-34 9-speed cassettes have been common for almost 20 years):
    Lowest ratio is 22/33 = 0.733, and the highest is 44/11 = 4.000

    Now take a 1x11 with a 32t ring and an 10-46 cassette
    Lowest is 32/42 = 0.762, and highest is 32/10 = 3.200

    So, the 3x8 has a slightly lower low, and a much higher high gear. More range. With some tweaking of the front single ring size, the 1x11 can raise the whole range up or down, but it is still going to be less overall range than the 3x8.

    Of course, in reality, I am being generous with the 1x11 drivetrain. Most newer drive-train cassettes are not 10-42 or 10-46, but 11-42 or 11-46, which is less range.

    Why less range? Well, a lot of riders realize that they don't really need it, and the advantages of going with a single ring up front outweighs the wide range of the 3x drivetrains. The release of these super wide 10-42 and 11-50 cassettes is not to extend the range over the old 3x setups, but just to match them.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  194. #194
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    Maybe the front chainrings are irrelevant because most of them are 22, 32, 42t; it's the cogs on the back that make the difference for climbing, correct? Do I really have the same range on a 7-speed 14-28t that someone has on an 11-speed 10-46t? Again, you can argue math all day, but I notice a huge difference even between 14-28t and 11-30t. 14-28t is so bad that I like to double-upshift just to get anything meaningful out of the gears, so I often use 1, 3, 5, 7 in the middle gear and forget 2, 4, 6. Top speed on a 14t back, and high front ring is a pathetic 15 mph, it's more like 25 mph on an 11t. Is any of this news to you guys?

  195. #195
    XC iconoclast
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,994
    OK but can 10-46t climb hills better than 11-30t or 11-34t? If not, is this all a marketing ploy for all-mountain bikes or something? So if I'm looking for a bike that can climb 20% inclines, what gearing is recommended? Are you saying it doesn't matter? BTW thank you for this education, you could be a dick and let a beginner stay confused, or you could do the right thing and be helpful. I appreciate it.

  196. #196
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    in one of my favorite areas in the county to go mountain biking, I have a Facebook blog about all of the different dirt roads and trails in the area. When I have time I'm going to categorize the trails according to beginner, cross-country, and all-mountain. Why? Because it's not just the experience and talent level of the mountain biker, it's what kind of bike they are actually bringing to this specific area that counts a lot for where they should go.

    Bottom line: this is just from a beginner, but it appears to me that beginner and XC trails favor the experienced, talented biker no matter what they ride, but the tougher the trail, the more bike you are going to need regardless of your skill level. It's a curve where tougher, all-mountain trails on the far end is proportional to the level (cost and quality) of bike needed.
    Yeah, this is misconception among among some people new to the sport. Unless you are talking about a trail with decent sized drops and jumps, people are going to hit that with everything from XC to AM bikes. They just have different approaches and priorities when riding it. Actually, pretty much any race that ends at the same elevation it begins is going to be won mostly by folks on XC bikes, regardless of how technical and rough it is.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  197. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    8,568
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    Maybe the front chainrings are irrelevant because most of them are 22, 32, 42t; it's the cogs on the back that make the difference for climbing, correct?
    No, it's the COMBINATION of the gear in the front and the gear in the back.

    I'm completely baffled as to how or why you feel compelled to completely ignore the front chainrings on a "3x" system. Have you never tried using your front derailleur?

    If you really can't seem to wrap your head around the math and physics of how gears work and more specifically what the front rings do, grab your bike and shift the rear to a middle-ish gear, like 3 or 4 down. Now go ride the bike up the same hill in the small front ring, then the middle one, then the big one, all the while never shifting the rear. Report back with your findings.

    Sinister Bikes
    Wraith Bicycles
    Sunday River Mtn Bike Park
    NEMBA
    Wachusett Brewing Co.

  198. #198
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    Rich, you may want to look at the join date of some of the guys you are discussing this with:

    slaphead: 2006
    kapusta: 2004
    chelboad: 2005
    jester: 2004
    me: 2006

    and most of us started riding well before our join date, I started in 1994, though I stopped in 2000 and started back in 2006. We've all probably ridden a good number of different bikes, different gear set-ups, different trails, 1x1s, owned different wheel size bikes, etc.

    We're really just trying to help you understand, we're not just arguing with you. Just realize that we have a lot more experience than you.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  199. #199
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    OK but can 10-46t climb hills better than 11-30t or 11-34t? .
    You can't answer that question without saying what size ring is up front.

    Think of gearing as a number that you get from dividing the size of the chairing by the size of the cog. The higher the number, the higher (harder) the gearing. It is like a fraction: Ring/Cog. If you want a lower (easier) gear, you can get that with a bigger cog (denominator) OR smaller ring (the numerator). There is actually a little more to it when you take the wheels into account, but for our purposes here, it is definitely close enough.

    So, to ask about a 10-46 vs 11-30 vs 14-28 without specifying what the rings are (how many and what size) it is impossible to directly compare.

    I think what you are missing when you talk about comparing your 14-28t cassette (or the 11-30t you are considering) to the 10-46 cassettes out there, is that you have (I assume) a 3x7 drivetrain. In other words, a triple crankset (three chainrings, which is where the "3x" part comes from in "3x7") with a 22t or 24t small ring that you can use to go into a lower gear. The 10-46t cassettes are meant to go with a single chainring crankset (that is where the "1x" part of a 1x10, 1x11 or 1x12 drive-train comes from), which is typically 32t or 36t. They don't have a smaller ring to drop into.

    You want to compare what the lowest gearing is? Do the math. (smallest Ring size) / (largest Cog size). But you HAVE to know what chainrings you are comparing to do that.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  200. #200
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,079
    Quote Originally Posted by chazpat View Post
    Rich, you may want to look at the join date of some of the guys you are discussing this with:

    slaphead: 2006
    kapusta: 2004
    chelboad: 2005
    jester: 2004
    me: 2006

    and most of us started riding well before our join date, I started in 1994, though I stopped in 2000 and started back in 2006. We've all probably ridden a good number of different bikes, different gear set-ups, different trails, 1x1s, owned different wheel size bikes, etc.
    .
    Wait, you all actually ride?

    Nobody told me I was suppose to be doing that.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

Page 1 of 4 1234 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: 253

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.