Is 27.5 going the way of the 26- Mtbr.com
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 200 of 299
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    499

    Is 27.5 going the way of the 26

    Is 27.5 (non plus) going the way of the 26. It seems that mast brands are moving away from 27.5 and moving towards only 27.5+ or 29.

    I just killed the fork on my 26" bike and am looking at new bikes. was originally thinking 27.5, but I am starting to think that it is an endangered species for midtravel (about 5") bike now. I like the agility of smaller wheels in general, and enjoy the technical aspects of trail features, and am not sure if I should cross 27.5 of the list or not.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    584
    I'm not all that tall and I like my bike playful so a 29er isn't really an option for me. Sure, I could get one but it's not something I can throw around very easiliy (compared to something that is a smaller wheel). I do have a 27.5 now, it's fun but I can't throw it around like I did my 26. I'm faster on the 27.5 for sure though because of the bigger wheel.

  3. #3
    EAT MORE GRIME
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,136
    no

    never

    26 is dead, 27.5 is here to stay
    "Put your seatbelt back on or get out and sit in the middle of that circle of death." - Johnny Scoot

  4. #4
    nvphatty
    Guest
    not for the foreseeable future.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,184
    I've been wondering the same thing ever since the Evil Following started getting those rave reviews. My 27.5 is only 3yrs old and I don't want anymore of the trail to disappear beneath even bigger wheels, but if 9rs can learn to turn and hop then why do we want the complexity of two wheel sizes?
    Rolling faster is nice and all, but I like riding all the terrain.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cookieMonster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    841
    Yes, it's on the way out. To be replaced with the new 28.125" standard. "For improved rollover while retaining playfulness."(TM).

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ray Lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,370
    I do not see 27.5 going anywhere but even if it did go like the 26 inch wheel size, a bike you buy today would be worn out long before tires and 27.5 specific parts became hard to get.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,230
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    if 9rs can learn to turn and hop then why do we want the complexity of two wheel sizes?
    Because the industry killed 26 even though there was nothing wrong with it and consumers are not willing to all go to 29ers, leaving 27.5 as really the only answer, because otherwise they have to all admit that they made a mistake trying to push everyone to 29ers.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by 127.0.0.1 View Post
    no

    never

    26 is dead, 27.5 is here to stay

    We're talking about the bike industry, nothing is here to stay.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    388
    26 is still here but quickly being phased out by the bike mfg industry. 29 will be next to go, not 27.5. fat (and mid-fat) bikes are currently at the top at the moment. Planned obsolescence is the only way the industry can keep making $$$
    2015 Santa Cruz 5010 C

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    The bike industry is different these days. Most companies are under the umbrella of larger companies, many of which had no previous ties to MTB. Profits have always been the focus, but never so much as today.

    As long as sales are there 27 it is. 26 never would have been replaced if sales hadn't fallen off a cliff compared to 29. If 29'er sales cause 27 sales to drop to a similar degree nothing is guaranteed. My personal opinion is that 29'ers will dominate the market soon with 27 dropping in sales similar to that of where we were when it was just 29 and 26. Whether the industry will try to reproduce the sales bump 27 ushered in once sales flatten out to where we were in 2012 is the wild card?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,230
    Obviously 29 didn't kill off 26 or so-called 27.5 (which is actually 650b) wouldn't be a mountain bike thing at all. 27.5 was their answer once they realized 1) they'd demonized 26 and 2) everyone wasn't going to buy a 29er, especially those of us who are smaller for which the tradeoffs are greater.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Timothy G. Parrish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,521
    I hope so. I got a sh!t ton of 26er stuff on clearance a few years ago. Now I can stock up on 27.5er parts too, and continue to ride my 26er and 27.5er until I die.

    And wheel sizes are apparently like opinions: everybody has one, and all others are wrong.

    Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,359
    Quote Originally Posted by micky View Post
    Is 27.5 (non plus) going the way of the 26. It seems that mast brands are moving away from 27.5 and moving towards only 27.5+ or 29.
    My take is that 27.5+ is having a moment in the sun, but I expect 27.5 non-plus to be around for the long haul. Possibly the market will settle on some intermediate width like 2.4 or 2.6.

    I just killed the fork on my 26" bike and am looking at new bikes.
    I'm having good luck running a 27.5 fork on my 26er. It's a Marzocchi, so I've got an obsolete brand on an obsolete wheel size . I totally get that you might prefer a new bike though.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cookieMonster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    841
    I'll be a little more serious now. As long as they keep making people shorter than 5' 8", long travel 29ers are going to be a hard sell. There's just only so small you can make a 29er.

    I have a good friend who's probably around 5' 5" - 135 pounds. He is the fastest rider I've ever seen besides Steve Peat. They don't make an aggressive 29er that would work for him as a competitive enduro race bike -- they're all too big.

    They have to keep making 27.5ers for a significant portion of the population. Women? Hello!!! My wife can't ride a 29er either.

    Finally, there are limitations and disadvantages to 29ers as well. I enjoy my 29" hardtail for xc. But it and all of the other 29ers I've ridden just had this "freight train " feel to them. Yes, they'll roll over shit -- but maybe I'd rather get surgical with my line choices. I enjoy my 26" freeride bike better than any 9er I've ridden when things get truly technical.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    499
    Thanks. Don't get me wrong, I am not against 29rs. but the ones I have ridden, although generally faster, kind of take away from some of the fun for me. I like to jump, I like challenging myself with tech features, I like tight trails, and it just seems like the trails I like are generally slower.

    I still enjoy my 26r, but a new fork with 140 or so of travel is pricey. and with the bike being 8 or 9 years old, not sure if buying obsolete new stuff is the wisest thing.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    325
    Have a few friends that just switched from 29ers to 27.5. They wanted a more playful bike. They commented the wagon wheels felt sluggish and hard to turn on fast switchbacks. Not all of us can ride like the pros, who obviously can ride anything fast. Furthermore, 2.6 tires on 27.5 wheels seems to be the goldilocks for a lot of riders. 27.5 should be around for awhile. 26 is still around also, they market that for kids or petite riders. Why all the wheel sizes you ask? Because we're all different and prefer different things. Choices are good people; we're not robots...

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Timothy G. Parrish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,521
    Quote Originally Posted by cookieMonster View Post
    I'll be a little more serious now. As long as they keep making people shorter than 5' 8", long travel 29ers are going to be a hard sell. There's just only so small you can make a 29er.

    I have a good friend who's probably around 5' 5" - 135 pounds. He is the fastest rider I've ever seen besides Steve Peat. They don't make an aggressive 29er that would work for him as a competitive enduro race bike -- they're all too big.

    They have to keep making 27.5ers for a significant portion of the population. Women? Hello!!! My wife can't ride a 29er either.

    Finally, there are limitations and disadvantages to 29ers as well. I enjoy my 29" hardtail for xc. But it and all of the other 29ers I've ridden just had this "freight train " feel to them. Yes, they'll roll over shit -- but maybe I'd rather get surgical with my line choices. I enjoy my 26" freeride bike better than any 9er I've ridden when things get truly technical.
    This is exactly why I chose a 27.5 when I purchased new in 2014. Every 29er I stood over felt like hopping onto a truck. 27.5 just fit better.

    Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    295
    I'm 5'-6" and I am riding a Foes Enduro Mixer that is 29"x 2.5" wide front and 27.5" x 2.5" wide rear. I can do all the same technical downhill sections as my Intense M1 26" DH bike but the Foes Mixer 29/27.5 climbs way better. Cornering and going over obstacles seems better on the mixed wheel set up, the outside diameter of the 29/27.5 is the same as a motocross/enduro motorcycle where this tire outside diameter ratio has been around in the motorcycle industry for many years. I have ridden 29" bikes and it seams like the rear is too high for me, the rear wheel seems to large for technical sections. I think both 29" and 27.5 will stay for quite awhile since there are taller people that like 29" and shorter people and people that like a more maneuverable bike that like 27.5"

    Erik
    Balle Racing
    www.balleracing.com

  20. #20
    I live to bike
    Reputation: Jwiffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,371
    Quote Originally Posted by BalleRacing View Post
    I'm 5'-6" and I am riding a Foes Enduro Mixer that is 29"x 2.5" wide front and 27.5" x 2.5" wide rear. I can do all the same technical downhill sections as my Intense M1 26" DH bike but the Foes Mixer 29/27.5 climbs way better. Cornering and going over obstacles seems better on the mixed wheel set up, the outside diameter of the 29/27.5 is the same as a motocross/enduro motorcycle where this tire outside diameter ratio has been around in the motorcycle industry for many years. I have ridden 29" bikes and it seams like the rear is too high for me, the rear wheel seems to large for technical sections. I think both 29" and 27.5 will stay for quite awhile since there are taller people that like 29" and shorter people and people that like a more maneuverable bike that like 27.5"

    Erik
    Balle Racing
    www.balleracing.com
    I have a 27.5+ bike that I'm running with a 29+ on the front. Love it.
    Stop in at Element Sports. www.elementsport.com
    Get Out! Have Fun!

  21. #21
    ZEN RIDER!
    Reputation: Mt.Biker E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    950
    Life in every breath

  22. #22
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by cookieMonster View Post
    I'll be a little more serious now. As long as they keep making people shorter than 5' 8", long travel 29ers are going to be a hard sell. There's just only so small you can make a 29er.

    I have a good friend who's probably around 5' 5" - 135 pounds. He is the fastest rider I've ever seen besides Steve Peat. They don't make an aggressive 29er that would work for him as a competitive enduro race bike -- they're all too big.

    They have to keep making 27.5ers for a significant portion of the population. Women? Hello!!! My wife can't ride a 29er either.
    ^^^ Here is the real answer. ^^^
    The bike industry wants to sell a new bike to everybody but there's a physical threshold that comes into play. It's hard if not impossible to build 29er frames for people under a certain height. Wheel size is the limiting factor. This is why 27.5" wheels exist -- so bike companies have stuff to sell. Short folks rejoice!
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  23. #23
    JCL
    JCL is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,527
    I'd be okay with running a 650b rear wheel if I was struggling with ass clearance but there's no way I'd run anything but a 29" on the front. I think it's probably as much benefit as a 2 degree slacker head angle.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by micky View Post
    Thanks. Don't get me wrong, I am not against 29rs. but the ones I have ridden, although generally faster, kind of take away from some of the fun for me. I like to jump, I like challenging myself with tech features, I like tight trails, and it just seems like the trails I like are generally slower.

    I still enjoy my 26r, but a new fork with 140 or so of travel is pricey. and with the bike being 8 or 9 years old, not sure if buying obsolete new stuff is the wisest thing.
    I would recommend holding off on buying something new because of standards. 157 super boost is a wild card right now. It could replace 148, or not, it's too early to tell. Maybe 157 will bring back 142 for smaller wheels when 148 dies? There's also boost front spacing. it's looking like 100x15 and 110x15 are dying. They are bringing back 110x20 but of course it won't be the same 110x20 spacing we've always had.

    I would go ahead and replace your fork and see how the market shakes out next year. You can find smoking deals on used forks, and 650b forks work perfectly well with 26" wheels.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: k2rider1964's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,625
    I don't foresee 27.5 going anywhere for the time being. No telling what the future holds. I have both wheel sizes and they both have their advantages but I generally prefer to ride 27.5 as it's more fun to throw around, bop off features, etc...if the terrain I liked to ride was onto wide open side, I might prefer my 29er but I like tight, twisty and chunk.
    Carpe Diem!!

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    As others have pointed out, unless you are strictly racing XC the 27.5 wheels make for a better long travel bike for anyone under about 5'10" imo.

    Seems there are a lot of freaky tall dudes riding bikes, wouldn't be surprised to see a larger tire get released for that group.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by cookieMonster View Post
    I'll be a little more serious now. As long as they keep making people shorter than 5' 8", long travel 29ers are going to be a hard sell. There's just only so small you can make a 29er.
    QFT. I do think narrower 27.5 tires will disappear, though.

    I run a 29/3 and 29/2.5 F/R split on my "XC" bike. 29/2.3 is slow and uncomfortable to me on our rocky, rooty SE trails. 27.5/2.3 feels like a kid's bike, I don't get on with any version of that wheel size. Too much inseam.

  28. #28
    BOOM goes the dynamite!
    Reputation: noapathy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,555
    Quote Originally Posted by cookieMonster View Post
    Yes, it's on the way out. To be replaced with the new 28.125" standard. "For improved rollover while retaining playfulness."(TM).
    What are you talking about? Just got word the new 26.75 wheeled models coming in 2020. Better acceleration and nimble as a cat.
    :nono: :thumbsup:

  29. #29
    i like rocks
    Reputation: euroford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,597
    Personally, i'm all about the 29" wheel. But that's because it compliments my ridding style and I like the way it feels. My bikes a long wheelbase 29" sled that just wants to plow through whatever is ahead of it. As much as I totally dig the high speed stability and rock garden munching plowishness, I can recognize that it has shortcomings. Its not a poppy or playful bike, though I can and do jump it, that's clearly not its forte.

    Though this isn't just about wheel size, I think its the biggest piece of the puzzle. If you want max speed over rough terrain, a 29er is obviously advantageous. If you want to design a fun, puppy, playfull jumpy bike, in general you'll be best to move a smaller wheel and I think the 27.5 is the best compromise in that respect. I'll say compromise... because even though I'll never have another 26" bike, I still feel that my 26" Transition Bottlerocket was the most fun and playful bike I've ever ridden and was ideal for bike park jump trails (i bet mine did 200 plus laps down Rainmaker during its long career), but when the going go rough, the smaller diameter wheels are by comparison an obvious hindrance in the rollover department.

    So no, 27.5 won't be going anywhere. Its the perfect compromise in being large enough to perform well on rough ground, yet small enough to compliment a bike that's intended to fun and playful.

    and hey, some people are short.
    Tim M Hovey

    Nukeproof Mega 290
    1950 CJ3a
    1999 BMW 540i
    1999 F350 PSD

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    207
    For me no. I am 6’ and only looking at 27.5” bikes. They are just more fun. I don’t race cross country and never will. Endurance sports are not fun the me. 27.5” is just more fun to throw around both on the ground and in the air.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LargeMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    526
    It will come down to if the mfgs can make money. In our shop 29ers still have the most sales with 27.5+ second and 27.5 almost non existent except in the $500 range.
    :nono:

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by LargeMan View Post
    It will come down to if the mfgs can make money. In our shop 29ers still have the most sales with 27.5+ second and 27.5 almost non existent except in the $500 range.
    What type of riding does you shop cater too? Is it “natural” single track or flow trail/bike park?

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    653
    Yeah that's gonna vary based on your local terrain and what brands your shop stocks.

    I have a local store that primarily focus on XC. The guys who ride there ride just XC and 29ers are what they push. Then another store next door just sell Giant, so they sell whatever Giant are making. And not too far away another store will sell a big variety however will sell a lot of longer travel trail bikes, and seem to sell a fairly even split between 29er, 27.5 and 27.5+, with a few DH bikes thrown in there (27.5).

    Out on the trails I'd say that I come across 75% 27.5 wheels.

    I won't lie, I'd love to get my old 26er HT running again with some fresh rims, tyres and running gear for some alternative fun and pump track time.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2,558
    27.5 is not going away anytime soon.

    Personally, at 6'5" I'm not sure if I'd buy another 27.5 bike though. The difference in agility is negligible between 29 and 27.5 to me. I come from bmx so neither feel "flickable".

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    As others have pointed out, unless you are strictly racing XC the 27.5 wheels make for a better long travel bike for anyone under about 5'10" imo.

    Seems there are a lot of freaky tall dudes riding bikes, wouldn't be surprised to see a larger tire get released for that group.
    Baring very short people, the whole body size wheel size thing only makes sense to me when butt buzz is a factor. Being tall isn't going to change how 29" turns, handles in the air, pumps.....

    When it comes to racing, we might see shorter riders opting for 29" in DH. Tracks are becoming wider and more wide open. As long as butt buzz can be managed, short riders can ride 29'ers just as fast as tall riders. 29" could end up being more advantageous for DH than XC? Really depends on the evolution of the tracks. We've already seen a move away from tight and technical tracks negating the advantage of smaller wheels. It's not far fetched to see 29'ers taking over DH just like XC. It actually makes more sense to me considering how fast 29'ers are when they don't need to get back up to speed or deal with natural terrain flat turns. EWS is different. Between tighter unsupported turns, and getting back up to speed, 29'ers lose their speed advantage.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Baring very short people, the whole body size wheel size thing only makes sense to me when butt buzz is a factor. Being tall isn't going to change how 29" turns, handles in the air, pumps.....
    I agree that the trend to match wheel size to rider height is a bit overrated. Being tall doesn't change how the 29er turns however bike size does. It makes sense to match wheel size to vehicle size (height and wheelbase). That's why go-karts, motocross bikes and trophy trucks all have different ideal wheel sizes. Imagine a DH bike with a 50" wheelbase bike with 16" tires. It would be terrifying, but 20" tires feel fine on a BMX bike. I do think taller riders are also able to cope with the larger wheel more easily than smaller riders. Bigger riders are better suited to handle the higher roll axis and mass. I'm not hung up on 29ers for tall people but it's also not as simple as butt buzz either.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LargeMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by Random Dude View Post
    What type of riding does you shop cater too? Is it “natural” single track or flow trail/bike park?
    Mostly natural singletrack, no bike parks within a few hours.
    :nono:

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    It's not that anyone wants to match wheel-size to rider height.

    It's that bigger wheels have notably better roll over in all cases, right up to the point that the bike is riding the rider and the geometry is less than ideal.

  39. #39
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Baring very short people, the whole body size wheel size thing only makes sense to me when butt buzz is a factor. Being tall isn't going to change how 29" turns, handles in the air, pumps.....
    Curious how you know this. We're each the height we are so we only have our own perspective. Therefore it seems impossible for someone who's say, 5'8" to know how someone who's 6'2" feels on a 29er. They only have their own perspective -- that of someone who's 5'8" (and I'm not saying that's your height). The reverse is equally true.

    So I wonder how you know. Perhaps a 29er under someone who's 6'2" feels similar to a 27.5er under someone who's 5'8"... I can't be sure so I wonder how someone else can. I personally only know that being 6'2" and having ridden all three wheel sizes, I don't feel my 29" wheels feel sluggish, hinder me while jumping, pumping, etc. They feel ideal for me. But then, I've never tried 36" wheels...

    TIA,
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    653
    Ignoring the rider height is ignoring the obvious. At what riding height do 29er wheels become unworkable? Are you saying never? Why do we start kids on 12" or 16" wheels and move them up through the wheel sizes, why not just start on 29ers? What about riders who already struggle with stack height and are using stem drop to get the bars back down?

    The other part, the rotational forces involved, are another factor. Changing the direction that a spinning wheel is pointing requires strength, and although short people aren't universally weaker, on average they will be. They also will often have shorter bars and therefore less leverage.

    Overall bike weight, although much less of an issue, is still affected. Smaller diameter wheels and tyres are quite simply always going to be able to be made lighter.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    Curious how you know this. We're each the height we are so we only have our own perspective. Therefore it seems impossible for someone who's say, 5'8" to know how someone who's 6'2" feels on a 29er. They only have their own perspective -- that of someone who's 5'8" (and I'm not saying that's your height). The reverse is equally true.

    So I wonder how you know. Perhaps a 29er under someone who's 6'2" feels similar to a 27.5er under someone who's 5'8"... I can't be sure so I wonder how someone else can. I personally only know that being 6'2" and having ridden all three wheel sizes, I don't feel my 29" wheels feel sluggish, hinder me while jumping, pumping, etc. They feel ideal for me. But then, I've never tried 36" wheels...

    TIA,
    =sParty
    True, I can't speak from experience, but this is common sense. Being tall isn't going to change a 29'ers turning radius, or a number of other inherent traits. I agree with Jeremey in that taller people would be able to leverage bigger wheels better, but that still doesn't change the natural traits bigger wheels. That's not to say a good rider can't do everything they did with smaller wheels and even do it better with 29". That comes down to comfort, skill, riding style... I'm just talking about things that will always be independent of rider size.

    Just because your 29'er doesn't hider your jumping game doesn't change the fact that bigger wheels are more prone to being pushed in the air. Just because your 29'er doesn't feel sluggish doesn't change the fact that they will always accelerate slower, get back up to speed slower, and draw a larger arc in the corners. All those things are independent of rider size. None of this means a tall rider like yourself won't find a 29'er to do everything better. It's all about fit and being comfortable. I have no boubt that you corner and jump better with 29, but I will argue that you can not make a 29" wheel go around a tight corner the same as 27" just because of your height.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    161
    I hope both 29 and 27.5 stay around.

    I am 6'4" and am really happy on my 29er. Just feels correct.

    My signific other is 5'3" and rides smaller wheel bikes as they fit her better.
    Good to have choices.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    8,420
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    T...accelerate slower, get back up to speed slower, and draw a larger arc in the corners...
    What's the diff between accelerate slower and get up to speed slower?

    How do bigger wheels draw a bigger arc? I would think that's dependent on wheelbase and bike geo, not wheel size.
    Do the math.

  44. #44
    BOOM goes the dynamite!
    Reputation: noapathy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,555
    It's raining. It's pouring. This is very uninteresting.
    :nono: :thumbsup:

  45. #45
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    comes down to comfort, skill, riding style... I'm just talking about things that will always be independent of rider size.
    I'm just not sure that's accurate, as "common sense" as it seems. Not saying you're wrong. I don't know.

    I do know I regularly clean switchbacks that shorter riders on smaller wheels don't. Up or down. They say they can't. These are guys & gals I've ridden with for years -- very experience riders. My center of gravity is higher, wheelbase longer, wheels bigger around... I can't figure this out. Maybe my larger bike (everything is larger -- wheels, crank length, frame size, blah blah) feels smaller to me than theirs does to them. I can't say. How could anyone really know?

    I'm simply frustrated by the blanket statement that 29ers don't handle/turn/hop/etc. as well as a smaller-wheeled bike. I submit that perhaps for some of us the 29er might. Maybe even better, comparatively. Again, who can say? All we've got is our own tiny little perspective.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    and draw a larger arc in the corners.
    That is incorrect.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremy3220 View Post
    That is incorrect.
    And no explanation as to why that's wrong? Unless you are comparing different wheel bases, and different geo/offset which I assumed wouldn't need to be said, I don't see any way to make a 29'er carve the same arc as 27. Please explain.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    And no explanation as to why that's wrong? Unless you are comparing different wheel bases, and different geo/offset which I assumed wouldn't need to be said, I don't see any way to make a 29'er carve the same arc as 27. Please explain.
    Because turning radius is only based on wheelbase and steering angle. turning radius

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,184
    I got my comeuppance last week when I told a pal how 9rs wont turn like my 27.5 bike, not even in the air. I'd crashed a Scalpel while trying to get the big-wheeled racer around a cool drop-away corner I love. On my bike I'll hop off the lip and I am setting up (turning) for the next berm while in the air. To me it felt like there was no way that 29" bike would change directions like my Process does. My pal flatly stated he could do it, and I know he's right. We all have perceptions and feel like they are absolute truth. Give me time and I might learn to turn one of those awkward ungainly clown size gaybikes too.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    207
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    I got my comeuppance last week when I told a pal how 9rs wont turn like my 27.5 bike, not even in the air. I'd crashed a Scalpel while trying to get the big-wheeled racer around a cool drop-away corner I love. On my bike I'll hop off the lip and I am setting up (turning) for the next berm while in the air. To me it felt like there was no way that 29" bike would change directions like my Process does. My pal flatly stated he could do it, and I know he's right. We all have perceptions and feel like they are absolute truth. Give me time and I might learn to turn one of those awkward ungainly clown size gaybikes too.
    First time I rode a 29er I almost wrecked it because I felt like it would not turn. I clipped a wooden wall after a short narrow down hill into a turn that I have ridden many times on my 27.5. Notably I have light carbon wheel and the 29er had much lower grade aluminum wheels

  51. #51
    Oh, So Interesting!
    Reputation: davec113's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,773
    I've hated riding 9ers until recently.

    Many of the new slack and long 9ers are AMAZING. My new Trek Slash is ridiculously good and it doesn't have that 9er on-top-of-the-bike monster-truck feel. Maybe the light carbon rims help, idk, but it doesn't give away it's wheel size by riding it, meaning you really can't tell it's a 9er, it doesn't share any of the downsides I've noticed riding other 9ers.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by davec113 View Post
    I've hated riding 9ers until recently.

    Many of the new slack and long 9ers are AMAZING. My new Trek Slash is ridiculously good and it doesn't have that 9er on-top-of-the-bike monster-truck feel.
    My Hightower LT feels totally different than the first 29er I tried out, a cumbersome hardtail. The Tallboy I tested felt super nimble. Based on the handling I wouldn't have known it had 29" wheels if I didn't know before hand.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    325
    Just finished a demo day with Transition Bike. Cool guys that work for that company. Most people I spoke with did not like the 29ers. The more popular bikes were the 27.5 and everyone was waiting for the Patrol. It's personal preference so ride what you like. Just surprised with the consensus.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,288
    Bike people are such fatalists.

    We had 26 inch rims for 30 years. We had 135 hubs, basically for 25? years. Even now, you just have to put a spacer on the hub. Disc brakes showed and stayed, unchanged. We went to threadless forks and the biggest change was making the bottom a little bigger (but you can still use the old size anyway). We changed to 27.5, which suspiciously still fits in 26er frames and forks. 11 and 12 speed is pretty cool, and it's neat that it 100% bolts right up to my early 2000 frame sitting in my rafters.

    Nothing's going away, it takes 500 years for anything to actually change in the bike industry

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,184
    no doubt
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    13,940
    Yes. Be honest with yourselves 27.5 is dead. So dead. It's basically so sad how dead it is. I mean you should be tired of how dead 27.5 is everyday you still have it.

    So here's what I'll do for you send me your bling 27.5 wheels. 142mm or 148mm I don't even care. I'll get rid of them for you in an environmentally friendly manner at no cost to you. That's right I'm not even charging for this amazing high quality service.

    Look to be even more helpful I'll let you send me any bling 27.5 frames you have that retail for at least $2K frame + shock. Hurry they are so obsolete it's kind of embarrassing you even have them.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2

    Totes

    I totally agree. When people say a bike is nimble and flickable, a big factor is the head tube angle and fork rake. The slacker bikes take steering input from weight shifts much more easily due to that small HT angle and big rake. Old 29ers had steep angles because fork manufacturers didn't want to change the rake from what they were doing with 26ers. That's all long in the past now...

    Obviously 27.5 will accelerate a little faster and be a little lighter, but its a slight difference compared to the dramatic change that HT angle makes in a bike.

    Peace!


    Quote Originally Posted by davec113 View Post
    I've hated riding 9ers until recently.

    Many of the new slack and long 9ers are AMAZING. My new Trek Slash is ridiculously good and it doesn't have that 9er on-top-of-the-bike monster-truck feel. Maybe the light carbon rims help, idk, but it doesn't give away it's wheel size by riding it, meaning you really can't tell it's a 9er, it doesn't share any of the downsides I've noticed riding other 9ers.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    5,095
    When people stop riding bikes ^^

    Maybe ;-P

    'Born to ride!'
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  59. #59
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,234
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremy3220 View Post
    That is incorrect.
    I find it to be 100% correct. In slow speed corners, "normal" 29er geometry has negated the goofy effects of stretching the chainstays and stupid reach values, like we had with the older generations of 29ers, but in medium radius turns, I find things are radically different.

    I find that you simply cannot maintain the same speed as a smaller wheel, you have to brake more before the turn, or you will simply skid through the turn and be pulled outwards by the gyroscopic force, which requires you to slow down even more. Then you have to pedal more to get back up to speed.

    On larger radius turns, at high speed, you can preserve a bit more speed and possibly go a little faster due to the stability, but that's the deal, more stability=less maneuverability, classic tradeoff. I did the 29er DH thing for a few seasons and I saw my best results when I went back to 27.5. Some of the other issues are that you have to pedal harder inbetween jumps, to get back up to speed, so it can be harder to make gaps, doubles and table-tops work out. I find they tend to jump "flatter" as well. Mainly though, I was amazed when I went back to 27.5 and everything became easier, easier to hit the jumps, make sections work, turn at speed, etc.

    Not everyone runs DH or hard-riding rubber on their 29er, so not everyone gets to experience this, but the further you push this tire size, the more you see these limitations IME.

    For the record, I think it's the way to go for XC/trail and most XC racing, the traction is great, it makes up for less travel a bit on the climbs with the wheel-size. Wheel-catchers are non-existent, and so on.

    Also for the record, there are viable enduro/DH-worthy 29ers, finally. You can ride these aggressively, down the same tracks people are using other bikes. This is not a huge limitation, I just find the overall traits I explained above to be present.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  60. #60
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361

    Did 27.5 ever go Big Box, Huffy or Walmart ?

    Just wondering if that market ever got much taste of 27.5 or is more exclusive to 29.

    Then of course, we can let opinions, interpretations or
    "what does that mean ?"

    FLY !!


    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    2,558
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    I find it to be 100% correct. In slow speed corners, "normal" 29er geometry has negated the goofy effects of stretching the chainstays and stupid reach values, like we had with the older generations of 29ers, but in medium radius turns, I find things are radically different.

    I find that you simply cannot maintain the same speed as a smaller wheel, you have to brake more before the turn, or you will simply skid through the turn and be pulled outwards by the gyroscopic force, which requires you to slow down even more. Then you have to pedal more to get back up to speed.

    On larger radius turns, at high speed, you can preserve a bit more speed and possibly go a little faster due to the stability, but that's the deal, more stability=less maneuverability, classic tradeoff. I did the 29er DH thing for a few seasons and I saw my best results when I went back to 27.5. Some of the other issues are that you have to pedal harder inbetween jumps, to get back up to speed, so it can be harder to make gaps, doubles and table-tops work out. I find they tend to jump "flatter" as well. Mainly though, I was amazed when I went back to 27.5 and everything became easier, easier to hit the jumps, make sections work, turn at speed, etc.

    Not everyone runs DH or hard-riding rubber on their 29er, so not everyone gets to experience this, but the further you push this tire size, the more you see these limitations IME.

    For the record, I think it's the way to go for XC/trail and most XC racing, the traction is great, it makes up for less travel a bit on the climbs with the wheel-size. Wheel-catchers are non-existent, and so on.

    Also for the record, there are viable enduro/DH-worthy 29ers, finally. You can ride these aggressively, down the same tracks people are using other bikes. This is not a huge limitation, I just find the overall traits I explained above to be present.
    Cornering speed and arc size are different things.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,404
    I've been pondering this for the last couple of weeks. If they can make 29" wheels strong enough for DH, then I can't really see the use of 650B for anything else other than comfortable sizing for the rider.
    I've got the last of the 26ers, I've ridden the 2015 650B version of my bike back to back at a bike park and I couldn't detect any difference in timing or feel, so I look at the industry wide change from 26 to 650B with a skepticism.
    Occasionally I think about getting a new bike, perhaps something with a touch less travel, but I can't see any performance benefits from not going to the bigger wheel size (rather than the tiny increase from 26 to 650B).

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    I think 27.5 makes a better overall bicycle for a small person. My wife would struggle on a trail ride on a 29er. Hopefully they will be available for many years to come. And I agree that they are essentially 26ers.

    I also think that XL and up, particularly for XC riding, is going to go bigger than 29er in the next couple of years.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I think 27.5 makes a better overall bicycle for a small person. My wife would struggle on a trail ride on a 29er. Hopefully they will be available for many years to come. And I agree that they are essentially 26ers.

    I also think that XL and up, particularly for XC riding, is going to go bigger than 29er in the next couple of years.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    I agree. I tried a bunch of 29er but I'm 5'7" so they all seem to be too big for me. I've seen a few 27.5+ but most people I know are still buying 27.5 and 29er. I really feel it's coming down to people's height.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    120
    I have been riding mtb's since the early 90's & have owned many bikes. I'm 6' 2" & I have test ridin many many 29'ers over the years & I hated them all. All the 29'er fan boys I know keep telling me "you would get used to it" ... I could get used to someone hitting me with a stick, but why would I want to? I will "never" own a 29'er & if that ends up being the only option for a new bike I just won't bike a new bike. 26 is not dead is is just a minority now. I know many riders who still prefer 26 .. including myself

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,288
    There's like 4 people total who still ride 26ers, I think we can definitely call it dead!

    27.5 doesn't roll as well as 29er, and maybe it's harder to ride... That's an appeal, not a downside necessarily. 27.5 bikes are fun, but that's hard to quantify and doesn't win races.

  67. #67
    Having a nice day!
    Reputation: LoneStar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,399
    I've made my peace with that fact I won't be winning any races I like both formats. I have a 27.5 FS and a 29 HT. Love switching between them to keep things interesting. Now if I were forced to pick one wheel size, I'd probably go with a low travel 29er. They do roll well!

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Meeners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    169
    Quote Originally Posted by DarknutMike View Post
    I have been riding mtb's since the early 90's & have owned many bikes. I'm 6' 2" & I have test ridin many many 29'ers over the years & I hated them all. All the 29'er fan boys I know keep telling me "you would get used to it" ... I could get used to someone hitting me with a stick, but why would I want to? I will "never" own a 29'er & if that ends up being the only option for a new bike I just won't bike a new bike. 26 is not dead is is just a minority now. I know many riders who still prefer 26 .. including myself
    Preach. Bought and owned a few 29's and albeit rolling over everything in sight I've opted out for everything 29 in the foreseeable future. I'd like to try 29+ one day, but 27.5+ is perfect for me. I still ride my 26" occasionally as well.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    13,940
    My main bike is a 29er, but I spent 4-5 years looking for "the one". My other bike is 275er and I just sold my 26er to a buddy. I'm digging the 29er a lot, but if you told me we were hitting the road to ride, camp and drink beer for 6 months and I'd have to ride my 275er or my 26er I would not care in the least. They are all fun bikes with different pros/cons.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: derrapancio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    i've been wondering the same thing ever since the evil following started getting those rave reviews. My 27.5 is only 3yrs old and i don't want anymore of the trail to disappear beneath even bigger wheels, but if 9rs can learn to turn and hop then why do we want the complexity of two wheel sizes?
    Rolling faster is nice and all, but i like riding all the terrain.
    a-men

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    120
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    There's like 4 people total who still ride 26ers, I think we can definitely call it dead! 27.5 doesn't roll as well as 29er, and maybe it's harder to ride... That's an appeal, not a downside necessarily. 27.5 bikes are fun, but that's hard to quantify and doesn't win races.
    I don't give a rats ass about racing. Biking for me is all about fun & flexy wheeled clown bikes are about as much fun as going to the dentist.

  72. #72
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,301
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    My main bike is a 29er, but I spent 4-5 years looking for "the one". My other bike is 275er and I just sold my 26er to a buddy. I'm digging the 29er a lot, but if you told me we were hitting the road to ride, camp and drink beer for 6 months and I'd have to ride my 275er or my 26er I would not care in the least. They are all fun bikes with different pros/cons.
    Same. I have a 29er, 27.5+ and a 26er and I enjoy them all. I never ride one and wish I was on one of the other ones.
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  73. #73
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by DarknutMike View Post
    I don't give a rats ass about racing. Biking for me is all about fun & flexy wheeled clown bikes are about as much fun as going to the dentist.
    Is 27.5 going the way of the 26-clown-bike.jpg
    Clown bikes have tiny wheels. Just sayin'.

    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    181
    Both my trail and enduro bikes are 27.5. I am 5'7" and weigh 150lbs all geared up. 29ers don't feel good to me for trail/enduro riding. All kinds of reasons already listed above. One fellow rider I ride with rides 26" and is hands down the best rider I have seen/ridden with. He is extremely fit and is a technically outstanding rider. He used to race bmx when he was a kid and thus why (I think) he prefers 26" wheels. He hates 29" wheels and shrugs off 27.5. He has said that the larger wheels mute the trails. His usual reply when asked about the less efficiency of the smaller wheels is "get more fit" and "work on your skills". He has said that when people are (very) tired, they make more mistakes on the trail and then tend to blame the equipment. It certainly made me pause and think about my own shortcomings from time to time (i.e., was it really my wheels, gearing, etc, or was my fitness and/or skill set to blame?). Anyway, just a different perspective that I thought I would share.

  75. #75
    Not a role model
    Reputation: ninjichor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    1,311
    I still see companies putting money towards 27.5. Just seems like it's no longer the majority, nor prime target for innovation, and more like a filler or refinement to adapt to the latest and greatest trend. Still seems like there's a solid market for 27.5 still.

    Though, it's not uncommon to hear people wishing for 29er versions of new 27.5 designs, or voicing disappointment that isn't not a 29er... even I feel like news of 27.5 doesn't excite me anymore, unless it's a 79er (mixed wheel size).

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,700
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    There's like 4 people total who still ride 26ers, I think we can definitely call it dead!

    27.5 doesn't roll as well as 29er, and maybe it's harder to ride... That's an appeal, not a downside necessarily. 27.5 bikes are fun, but that's hard to quantify and doesn't win races.
    I'm 1 of 4. I actually just built up a new 26er. Dang it's Nimble, lol!

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,184
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Clown bike.jpg 
Views:	468 
Size:	59.0 KB 
ID:	1232097
    Clown bikes have tiny wheels. Just sayin'.

    =sParty
    That picture don't count Sparty, it's not a clown shoe bike. See how he is forced to carry his feet?
    Bytheway how did you get a photo of me on my kids bike?
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  78. #78
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by ninjichor View Post
    I still see companies putting money towards 27.5. Just seems like it's no longer the majority, nor prime target for innovation, and more like a filler or refinement to adapt to the latest and greatest trend. Still seems like there's a solid market for 27.5 still.

    Though, it's not uncommon to hear people wishing for 29er versions of new 27.5 designs, or voicing disappointment that isn't not a 29er... even I feel like news of 27.5 doesn't excite me anymore, unless it's a 79er (mixed wheel size).
    I believe our sport absolutely needs the 27.5” wheel. I hope the 27.5” wheel never goes away. Same for 26” wheels. Why? Because all riders deserve a well designed frame, including those who aren’t tall enough to fit on a frame designed around the 29” wheel. For those riders, smaller wheels are the answer.

    Sadly, I fear it’s too late for 26” wheels — that ship has sailed. Now younger riders have to make the jump from 24” wheels to 27.5” wheels as they grow. Too bad 26” wheeled bikes are no longer there to bridge that gap.

    Personally, I’d cheerfully ride 27.5” wheels if I were shorter, tho if that were the case I imagine I’d wish I could enjoy the improved rollover and reduced rolling resistance of a 29” wheeled bike.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: plummet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,055
    I reckon plus tyres are a fad. We raced them downhill back in 2000 with super heavy casing. The 3" Gazza was stuff of legends. Now theres super thin wall + tyres. They roller slower than the smaller brother and get way more side wall quirm if not pumped up hard. When pumped up hard they offer less traction the a 2.3/2.5.
    Essentially they are the worst of both worlds. Bad traction, bad rolling resistance.


    Also plus size attempt to add some squish to your frame without adding additonaly suspension. Thats also stupid!. More suspension less tyre is far superior than more tyre
    less travel

    Theres a reason the pro dont race fat... it just worse.


    Now if you live in sandy or snowy landing and need a ballon tyre to track over the soft the yeah sure go + size.

  80. #80
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    12,507

    Recommendations I still remember

    27.5 to pop and play, 29r for xc speed and cover most ground by end of day.

    Words.....
    Ripley V1 XC/Gravel Adventure rig
    NORCO Fluid FS
    Salsa Timberjack

  81. #81
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    29er 1x = clown wheels with clown cassette
    27.5 2x = fun wheels with fun cassette

    The choice is clear.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    29er 1x = clown wheels with clown cassette
    27.5 2x = fun wheels with fun cassette

    The choice is clear.
    Fun wheels with a fun cassette and that oh-so-fun front derailleur....no thanks.

    If the choice is so clear, why are people going away from 27.5" wheels and a drivetrain with a crappy front der with all of its' headaches and tons of overlap gearing? Is everybody a clown that has no fun but you? Damn, I thought I was really having a blast on my 29'ers, as well as my 27.5's. But if I have to have a left-hand shifter to have a good time, I'm gonna find a different place for my kicks.
    Ibis Ripmo V2
    Ibis Ripley V4
    Ibis Mojo HD5
    Pivot Mach 4SL
    Pivot LES SS
    A road bike

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Darth Lefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,392
    No matter what the fad was, someone will be nostalgic. Raleigh 3-speeds, Stingrays, bike boom 10-speeds, BMX, 1980s triathlon bikes, 21 speed rigid MTB's, 27-speed hard tails, on and on.

    It does seem like no one is very nostalgic for elastomer forks or 10-speed rears

  84. #84
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    29er 1x = clown wheels with clown cassette
    27.5 2x = fun wheels with fun cassette

    The choice is clear.
    26 3x?
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  85. #85
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    12,507
    Quote Originally Posted by BmanInTheD View Post
    Fun wheels with a fun cassette and that oh-so-fun front derailleur....no thanks.

    If the choice is so clear, why are people going away from 27.5" wheels and a drivetrain with a crappy front der with all of its' headaches and tons of overlap gearing? Is everybody a clown that has no fun but you? Damn, I thought I was really having a blast on my 29'ers, as well as my 27.5's. But if I have to have a left-hand shifter to have a good time, I'm gonna find a different place for my kicks.
    Yeah if anything Schultzee has it backwards! Heh heh...
    Ripley V1 XC/Gravel Adventure rig
    NORCO Fluid FS
    Salsa Timberjack

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    40
    Non-plus 27.5” is clearly going the way of the 26”. Soon things like tire, fork and wheels selection will diminish and non-plus 27.5” options that are left for these components will become more entry level with the majority of product development geared toward the 29” diameter for the mid to high end components. Could be that we see 27.5” become the female specific wheel size or become the entry level wheel size or just go away all together.

    Either way, there is no denying the future looks very questionable for the non-plus 27.5” wheel as even pinkbike has pretty much lost all interest in it. I would think that product developers for bike and component companies take notice of things like the below article with only one pinkbike editor choosing a 27.5” as their “ideal” wheel size and supporting the idea that 27.5” might become a female specific wheel size.

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/pinkbi...-favorite.html
    keepoaklandfresh

    I'm gonna put on an iron shirt and ride my bike all over this eart'

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    447
    Deleting this post. I should know better than to post things like this....

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Talking to my LBS manager recently and he's selling far more 29ers than 27.5 and will not stock very many of the small-wheel bikes. The bigger wheels seem to be where the market is these days.

    That said, I'm very happy on my little wheel 27.5 bike.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Darth Lefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,392
    It's easier to sell a guy a "large" than a "medium" and he might tolerate "plus size" but maybe not so much "fat"

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,411
    I honestly don't want the 27.5 to go away. I've got a 29, 27.5, 27.5+. I like them all for the different riding experience they give me. We need more choices...not less.

  91. #91
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Quote Originally Posted by BmanInTheD View Post
    Fun wheels with a fun cassette and that oh-so-fun front derailleur....no thanks.

    If the choice is so clear, why are people going away from 27.5" wheels and a drivetrain with a crappy front der with all of its' headaches and tons of overlap gearing? Is everybody a clown that has no fun but you? Damn, I thought I was really having a blast on my 29'ers, as well as my 27.5's. But if I have to have a left-hand shifter to have a good time, I'm gonna find a different place for my kicks.
    Shimano 2x11 technology is amaaaazing. If you think it's crappy you just don't know how to use it.

  92. #92
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    12,507
    Quote Originally Posted by shortbutfunky View Post
    Non-plus 27.5” is clearly going the way of the 26”. Soon things like tire, fork and wheels selection will diminish and non-plus 27.5” options that are left for these components will become more entry level with the majority of product development geared toward the 29” diameter for the mid to high end components. Could be that we see 27.5” become the female specific wheel size or become the entry level wheel size or just go away all together.

    Either way, there is no denying the future looks very questionable for the non-plus 27.5” wheel as even pinkbike has pretty much lost all interest in it. I would think that product developers for bike and component companies take notice of things like the below article with only one pinkbike editor choosing a 27.5” as their “ideal” wheel size and supporting the idea that 27.5” might become a female specific wheel size.

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/pinkbi...-favorite.html
    29ers are moving to 148 boost too so does that mean they're going to be extinct aswell?
    Ripley V1 XC/Gravel Adventure rig
    NORCO Fluid FS
    Salsa Timberjack

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by JMac47 View Post
    29ers are moving to 148 boost too so does that mean they're going to be extinct aswell?
    What are you talking about? None of that questions makes any sense. Why would 29ers go “extinct” if they move to 148 boost? All that would go extinct would be a hub, the wheels will still stay 29” or 27.5+ regardless of hub spacing.

    You can use that hub to lace some old 650b rims to and keep the 27.5” running a little longer.
    keepoaklandfresh

    I'm gonna put on an iron shirt and ride my bike all over this eart'

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    Shimano 2x11 technology is amaaaazing. If you think it's crappy you just don't know how to use it.
    Shift the front der with your left thumb, the rear with your right. What am I missing? Besides a bunch of overlapping ratios, cross-chaining, and janky noises as the derailleur tries to shift to the big ring. I know how to use it, and did for years, just prefer not too.
    Ibis Ripmo V2
    Ibis Ripley V4
    Ibis Mojo HD5
    Pivot Mach 4SL
    Pivot LES SS
    A road bike

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    181
    I have heard that bike companies are hurting. I think the large bike manufactures will scale down their 27.5 offerings. I also heard that Giant may not release a downhill bike next year. 29ers are far outselling 27.5 and the focus will be there (design/marketing). Personally, 27.5 works better for me (small stature) and I'm building a new 27.5 enduro bike this winter, so I hope it is around for awhile longer. I will say that I recently rode a Ibis Ripmo and thought it would have that monster truck "on the bike" feel but it actually didn't feel too bad...certainly more "in the bike" feel as compared to other 29ers I had ridden years prior.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Much the same that the industry went 27.5 over 26 to drive sales, it appears that they are now making the push from 27.5 to 29. The "reviewers", i.e. industry mouthpieces, are pushing the new big-wheel bikes.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,404
    And that's what is so frustrating. 29 and 26 could've existed quite happily. 650B was such a weird move. A very cynical industry move.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,288
    A lot of us like the change from 26 to 27.5 wheels. If anything, it took a really, really long time to finally change it. It was a good move and im glad it happened. 26er is dead, and good riddance!

    Overwhelmingly, people buy whole bikes. Wheels, suspension, bars, stems, freehubs, the market wants complete bikes ready to ride. I dont know why people think its even reasonable to expect a complete bike to be backwards compatible with the old bike they're replacing. That sounds like lazy engineering, just recycling the same ideas with no innovation.

    29ers used to suck pretty bad. They were clunky and cumbersome. 26ers were not. 27.5 were not. They finally figured out how to make 29ers nimble and most importantly, fun! So yes, they're pushing 29ers now, since they're getting revamped. 27.5 was already there and good to go. Its not that 27.5 is going obsolete or anything, it was just already where 29ers are just stepping into.

    We're ending up with 29ers that are badass. We already have 27.5 bikes that are badass. We're getting forks and shocks that finally work. I dont understand the resistance to these changes, they're sort of amazing!

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    I dont understand the resistance to these changes, they're sort of amazing!
    The "resistance" is dropping $5k or more for a new bike. I don't doubt that they are amazing. Will you buy me one?
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Curveball View Post
    The "resistance" is dropping $5k or more for a new bike. I don't doubt that they are amazing. Will you buy me one?
    You in no way have to buy a 5k bike. My orbea was $1900 on sale, but I could have kept riding my 26er for another decade if I didnt want to spend the money.

    No one is being forced into new anything.

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,404
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    A lot of us like the change from 26 to 27.5 wheels. If anything, it took a really, really long time to finally change it. It was a good move and im glad it happened. 26er is dead, and good riddance!
    Did you mean 29 to 650B? There's almost no difference between 26 and 650B. 25mm diameter, so 12.5mm essentially. In fact attempts to measure the difference suggests the variation is down to statistical error. In fact with some wacky tire combos you could end up with the same total diameter on both rims.
    I rode my bike which is the last 26 they made, with the 2015 replacement which was 650B alternating for a day in a bike park. Everything was identical except the brakes. I didn't notice any difference. 29 on the other hand is proven quicker for most disciplines, and now that they seem to be able to make wheels strong enough for DH they could probably d to away with 650 too. Still, my bike has life in yet.

  102. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,184
    Quote Originally Posted by Curveball View Post
    The "resistance" is dropping $5k or more for a new bike. I don't doubt that they are amazing.
    This is so true for me. In 1999 I was happy to pay top dollar for a really light FS bike. Now my circumstance limits available $ and I think it sucks to spend $2k and get heavy as lead cassettes and wheels. Even at $5k the components are lower mid-level. Yes they work fantastic and last way better than what my top dollar fork/shock did 20yrs ago; that is a great thing, but the cost has skyrocketed. It's a good thing we don't NEED latest&greatest to love our trail time.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,184
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudguard View Post
    I rode my bike which is the last 26 they made, with the 2015 replacement which was 650B alternating for a day in a bike park. .
    Maybe it was the trail type in that park, but 4yrs ago I switched and bought a 27.5. 1st thing I noticed was the roll-over amazed me. I was use to going over steps that would try and stop the bike. By staying back an riding aggressive you'd avoid an endo, but the bike would shudder at the impact. I know/knew the bigger 29 offered more of that, but there is more than roll over to consider. I actually sometimes think big wheels make it too easy. I also get frustrated when rocks and roots get removed/covered. I mean come on! The big wheels we have now already make easier.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    I was really pissed when the bike industry went from 27.5 to 650B. Or was it the other way around?
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    You in no way have to buy a 5k bike. My orbea was $1900 on sale, but I could have kept riding my 26er for another decade if I didnt want to spend the money.

    No one is being forced into new anything.
    I was just using $5k because that's where the preponderance of really decent bikes generally begins. I know you can get cheaper.

    The new crop of 29er's look really nice, but I don't change bikes every couple of years and will continue to ride my 27.5 for the foreseeable future.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  106. #106
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Quote Originally Posted by BmanInTheD View Post
    Shift the front der with your left thumb, the rear with your right. What am I missing? Besides a bunch of overlapping ratios, cross-chaining, and janky noises as the derailleur tries to shift to the big ring. I know how to use it, and did for years, just prefer not too.
    You're missing quite a bit. You can use either ring with all gears no problem. It's more like a 1x11 with two chainring options. A few overlapping ratios is irrelevant. You get a front shift worth about 3 rear shifts so you don't have to be cranking on the right shifter all the time. Shifts are almost instant. there is no jank.

  107. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,404
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    Maybe it was the trail type in that park, but 4yrs ago I switched and bought a 27.5..
    What was your old and what is your new bike?

  108. #108
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    12,507
    Quote Originally Posted by shortbutfunky View Post
    What are you talking about? None of that questions makes any sense. Why would 29ers go “extinct” if they move to 148 boost? All that would go extinct would be a hub, the wheels will still stay 29” or 27.5+ regardless of hub spacing.

    You can use that hub to lace some old 650b rims to and keep the 27.5” running a little longer.
    Reading comprehension. Reg non boost 142 29ers going extinct because now 148/157 superboost is the new(er) fad was my point. Good idea to delete yourself then if you're getting that upset not liking others opinions/comments.
    Ripley V1 XC/Gravel Adventure rig
    NORCO Fluid FS
    Salsa Timberjack

  109. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    4,660
    Looks like Giant will end up eating a lot of crow.

  110. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by JMac47 View Post
    Reading comprehension. Reg non boost 142 29ers going extinct because now 148/157 superboost is the new(er) fad was my point. Good idea to delete yourself then if you're getting that upset not liking others opinions/comments.
    Sure doesn’t sound like he is getting upset, at all, to me. And not sure what you’re talking about with calling out reading comprehension as this thread is about wheel size, not hub standards. Maybe reread the title of the thread because pointing out hub standards is like pointing out BB standards, it’s irrelivent since 29ers aren’t going anywhere regardless if hub or B.B. or whatever other standards change.

    Also, telling him “good idea to delete yourself” sounds a little aggressive, almost like you’re getting fired up, maybe even... upset? It seems he is just pointing out that what your saying doesn’t make sense.

    For example, if I have a 29er with non-boost hubs and the frame breaks and I get warrantied a new 29er frame with boost spacing because they don’t make the non-boost spacing anymore, then all I would have to do is get a boost hub and some new spokes and lace it up to my rear rim. Super easy and all my other parts including all my extra tires (front and rear), entire front wheel and fork will transfer over. And I would still be riding what is now become standard wheel size for mountain bikes, a 29er, but with little bit stiffer rear end. So, still riding a 29er, just a slightly more updated one.

    If you have a 27.5” and the frame breaks and you get warrantied a new frame and it is a 29er with boost spacing because they don’t make a 27.5” frame anymore, then your now going way beyond a new hub and some spokes. Your now talking about getting an entire new rear wheel (hub, spokes, rim, rim tape) replacing all your different sets of rear tires and your front ones also, because you’ll need an entirely new front wheel as well as front tires and, of course, an entirely new fork. And when you’re done buying all that, you’ll now be riding a bike that is much different than your old bike and no longer a 27.5”, but a 29er. However, as pointed out, the editors of pinkbike have indicated it would be a much better ride, so you’ll have that going for you

    Hope that didn’t get you anymore upset.

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    43
    I was just at the bike shops and half the bikes around were 27.5 or 27.5+

  112. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    ^so, then 75% were 29er/27.5+ and 25% non-plus 27.5”? Sounds about right. Probably take them a while to get the 25% of non-plus 27.5” stock sold down. Could catch some good sales on those.

  113. #113
    Not a role model
    Reputation: ninjichor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    1,311
    Quote Originally Posted by John Kuhl View Post
    Looks like Giant will end up eating a lot of crow.
    Have they made a good handling 29er yet?

    I know some of their 29ers are selling/popular, but I'll leave the judgement to those that do extensive comparison testing with the likes of the many 29er trail, am, and enduro bikes being introduced.

    From what little I've seen, their Reign is the only one getting recognized as a *top* contender in its category (e.g. editors' choice award), so I guess they can still say 27.5 is their forte.

  114. #114
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Giant will just ignore the past and consumers will let it slide, just like they let the following things slide: stealing DW's ip and calling it maestro, lying in adverts about road bike frame weights, lying in adverts about aero road frame performance, and those are just the things off the top of my head.

  115. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    126
    No way. 27.5 is as large you will go for smaller riders not going for podiums or ride xc professionally. That is a huge market.

    We might see 29 be replaced by 30 or 31 though as it will be faster for 5.11 up riders riding xc professionally. The rest of the world needs to follow them to get same fame and speed. Reviewers will all agree.

  116. #116
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    252
    I'm 5'8" with a 30" inseam. I've ridden several 29ers and it always feels like the ride and wheels are too tall.

    The first was a 2014 trek 29er with 100mm of travel. The bike was setup properly for my weight. Compared to 27.5, it felt sluggish and oversized. It wasn't a fun ride.

    The second was the pivot shuttle with 29" wheels. Same feeling. The wheels felt too big, slowing acceleration compared with 27.5 and wth sluggish handling.

    27.5 feels more "playful" and more maneuverable while having much better rollover compared to 26.

    29ers can also compromise standover as well, which I for one, still think is a good thing.

    I really like 27.5 and 27.5+. I hope to demo the trek 29+ Stache soon. Maybe that will change my mind. I really like the plush feel of + sized tires.

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    499
    I have a 27.5 FS now. truth is I love it. have ridden 29rs, and they are faster and have a smoother effect. but, I still have my 26 HT and that bike is just wrong. F-ing wrong. So wrong that I still ride it on smoother trails or trails with jumps and urban type fun.

    at the end of the day.... to each his own

  118. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    Looks like 27.5” continues the dying trend for 2019...


    “Within the subcategories there were some increases as some specific styles went in or out of fashion. For example, 27.5-inch full suspension bikes declined 54.5 percent in units, as tastes shifted to 29-inch full suspension bikes, where sales were up 61.3 percent. In the road category, the “Performance Men’s” subcategory was the only one in positive territory, showing a 0.1 percent increase in dollars but a 22.6 percent decline in units.”

    Another year or two of trends like this and there will not be many options out there for 27.5”

    https://www.bicycleretailer.com/stud...s#.XKT78yRlChB

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,411
    Any particular reason for this burning desire for the 27.5 to get phased out? Less wheel sizes means less choices to me.

  120. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    ^More of an “I told you so”. Not necessarily you, but I thought the introduction of a 3rd wheel size was really stupid and originally brought out as a way to phase out 26” and 29” and make just one wheel size so it’s easier for manufactures to increase efficiencies and profits. That, and all the false advertising about 27.5” put out by manufactures like Giant really annoyed me. So, I am not for less wheel sizes, the exact opposite. I want differentiation and I get more of that with 26” and 29”.

    27.5” killed the 26” and is now itself dying because it is not as good as the 29”. And because of the 27.5” wheel size marketed so heavily as the next standard and killing the 26”, we are now going to be left with only one wheel size.

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,411
    Lol...I can see where you are coming from...but bike companies got to do stuff to keep the lights on. I don't see any difference on how the 29r got hot again with the resurgence of the 29r marketing. I think a lot of people rolled their eyes at Giant's marketing on the 27.5.

    I honestly don't think the 27.5 will die out. I've got a 27.5 (Banshee Spitfire) and just built up another 29r (Evil Following)...and I would not replace my Banshee with the Evil. There is just nothing the 29r can do to replace the low slung feel of the 27.5 wheels.

  122. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,963
    Quote Originally Posted by tahoebeau View Post
    Looks like 27.5” continues the dying trend for 2019...


    “Within the subcategories there were some increases as some specific styles went in or out of fashion. For example, 27.5-inch full suspension bikes declined 54.5 percent in units, as tastes shifted to 29-inch full suspension bikes, where sales were up 61.3 percent. In the road category, the “Performance Men’s” subcategory was the only one in positive territory, showing a 0.1 percent increase in dollars but a 22.6 percent decline in units.”

    Another year or two of trends like this and there will not be many options out there for 27.5”

    https://www.bicycleretailer.com/stud...s#.XKT78yRlChB

    From the article, they don't seem to differentiate 27.5 from 27.5+, which does seem to imply that 27.5 is dying quickly and being replaced by 29" bikes. Kinda surprised at this but the trend looks pretty clear. However, it would be of value to see the true number of units sold and not % change or just $ value of sold units.
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    325
    These assumptions are far fetched. It's like saying Suvs are outselling sedans so now sedans are phased out. People want choices. The group I ride with, most of us are on 27.5. One guy switched from 29 to 27.5 because he wanted a more agile bike. A couple of guys are short and don't feel comfortable on the wagon wheel. I like the new 29" bikes. Definitely better than before. Just because you like 29ers doesn't mean everybody should also. Furthermore, it's just a freakin bike, quit trying to complicate things. Go ride whatever wheel size and have fun.

  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fairbanks007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottieM8 View Post
    These assumptions are far fetched. It's like saying Suvs are outselling sedans so now sedans are phased out.
    This is already happening.

    https://autoweek.com/article/car-new...able-crossover

  125. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by tahoebeau View Post
    Looks like 27.5” continues the dying trend for 2019...


    “Within the subcategories there were some increases as some specific styles went in or out of fashion. For example, 27.5-inch full suspension bikes declined 54.5 percent in units, as tastes shifted to 29-inch full suspension bikes, where sales were up 61.3 percent. In the road category, the “Performance Men’s” subcategory was the only one in positive territory, showing a 0.1 percent increase in dollars but a 22.6 percent decline in units.”

    Another year or two of trends like this and there will not be many options out there for 27.5”

    https://www.bicycleretailer.com/stud...s#.XKT78yRlChB
    Not sure how similar these numbers are to 26" vs 29" before the industry pulled the plug but my guess is they are pretty close. The difference here is 26 was replaced not removed. I can't see the industry removing 27" as an option but the industry will for sure follow the money. The sales bump you listed will settle down so you know the industry will have to cook up something new. My money is on mixed being the next push which will keep new 27" tires and rims coming. There's growing interest, marketing will be easy, new tire combo's to be sold. Maybe even new axle standards optimized for mixed sizes. Mixed could be the bike industrie's wetdream.

  126. #126
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,060
    Quote Originally Posted by noapathy View Post
    It's raining. It's pouring. This is very uninteresting.
    this:

    Is 27.5 going the way of the 26-screen-shot-2019-04-03-7.28.37-pm.png

  127. #127
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudguard View Post
    And that's what is so frustrating. 29 and 26 could've existed quite happily. 650B was such a weird move. A very cynical industry move.
    out of simple curiosity, are you able to articulate what was cynical about introducing 650b wheels to mountain bikes? 650b wheels which have actually been around quite awhile?

  128. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    Lol...I can see where you are coming from... but bike companies got to do stuff to keep the lights on. I think a lot of people rolled their eyes at Giant's marketing on the 27.5.
    Yes, I agree, but would add that more people believed the Giant marketing (and many still do).

    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    There is just nothing the 29r can do to replace the low slung feel of the 27.5 wheels.
    I again totally agree with this, but would add that the 26” was even better with this so that means we no longer have the best option available if your looking for a bike with a low slung feel.


    Quote Originally Posted by Vespasianus View Post
    From the article, they don't seem to differentiate 27.5 from 27.5+, which does seem to imply that 27.5 is dying quickly and being replaced by 29" bikes.
    I am pretty sure they consider 27.5+ a 29er since practically all 27.5+ bikes are just 29ers with 27.5+ wheels and a slightly longer fork.

    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    The difference here is 26 was replaced not removed. I can't see the industry removing 27" as an option but the industry will for sure follow the money. The sales bump you listed will settle down so you know the industry will have to cook up something new. My money is on mixed being the next push which will keep new 27" tires and rims coming. There's growing interest, marketing will be easy, new tire combo's to be sold. Maybe even new axle standards optimized for mixed sizes. Mixed could be the bike industrie's wetdream.
    As VR6 pointed out “bike companies will do anything to keep the lights on” and that includes turing its back on any standard including wheel size. The “bump” I listed has been going on for 15 months now with BRAIN reporting this January that “Just in the last 12 months, sales of 27.5-inch mountain bikes have plummeted, as 29ers regained market share.

    And this isn't a trend that IBDs and manufactures are just starting to notice as BRAIN had been reporting throughout 2018 about the “dramatic switch-over from sales of 27.5-inch full suspension bikes back to 29-inch full-suspension”. Given this 15 month industry trend, there is no way IBDs are stocking up on 27.5” bikes and that means manufactures for bikes and parts like forks, wheels and tires are not getting orders for 27.5” and therefore... they are not manufacturing them. So, the industry will not intentionally remove 27.5”, but is removing it unintentionally.

    As far as mixed wheel size, I am sure some more will continue to experiment, but that has been tried before many times since the beginning of mountain biking and many times throughout and will never become mainstream.

  129. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    126
    Who says the current trend is right?
    Looking at smallish riders riding largish bikes on 29 with a wide bar is often a sad sight. The bike is riding with them. It looks stiff and like its a hard job. Not fun.
    If my goal is to get fast from a to b i take my 29 wheelset, but what is the meaning of that doing that as a hobby? On a mtb???
    I recon 29 is a wellcome change for 180cm plus riders and can easily see 30 inch comming for xc but for the rest it just takes a lot of joy and fun away.
    I hope 27.5 is here to stay and they stop forcing it down the throat of eg. the DH people. Then get 30 for xc.
    30 will be much faster than 29. It will roll over roots and rough stuff better. The new frames can take it.

  130. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    The next big thing will be 29" front with 27.5" rear. This will keep 27.5" relevant.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  131. #131
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: Train Wreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,546
    Is 27.5 going the way of the 26-20d533e8-0335-4877-bb72-c4fa42b28e6e.jpg

  132. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The next big thing will be 29" front with 27.5" rear. This will keep 27.5" relevant.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    yep. My guess is the indusry will not undercut the current sales bump though. I give it two years before 29'er sales level off, then the indusry will push mixed hard. While mixed will keep new rims and tires coming, it could shrink the full 27" market dramatically? Of course anyone could just over fork a mixed bike if they want a 27" front wheel. You'll need to really over fork though because as we all know 27.5 is marketing BS, it's actually 26.99 or 27" to not split hairs, so we'll need 50mm axle to crown increase to equal a 29" front wheel. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out but I would be surprised if mixed isn't the next big push.

  133. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Legbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,564
    I'm always surprised that people don't remember that 650b was more of a grassroots movement long before a major manufacturer brought one out. Once KHS and maybe a few others brought some out no one wanted to be left with 26 bikes that probably would have gone unsold. Certainly no conspiracy.
    Formerly Travis Bickle

    Team Robot. "modulation is code for “I suck at brake control.” Here’s a free tip: get better."

  134. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    870
    I just wish 26 wasn't dead. I'd love to build up a 26in bike to dick around on and I hope 27.5 (non-plus) doesn't go the same way.

    While I enjoy the speed of 29 all lot of the time, a small wheel option would be fun.
    Last edited by 93EXCivic; 04-05-2019 at 06:55 AM.
    Ragley Big Wig, Sunday Soundwave (BMX), 91 Schwinn High Plain (single speed "gravel" bike), Nashbar CXSS (on trainer)

  135. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    41
    I hate 29 wheels. Ruins bikes for me. If I was racing, ya I'd use them, but otherwise I want nothing to do with them. 188cm here.

  136. #136
    Rides all the bikes!
    Reputation: Sidewalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    3,544
    My one friend is still happily riding his 26" Intense Uzzi. Another friend just bought a new 27.5" Enduro. I'm hopefully taking delivery of my new E29 to replace my old E29 (I actually wanted E650B, but the package deal was better).

  137. #137
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Train Wreck View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20D533E8-0335-4877-BB72-C4FA42B28E6E.jpg 
Views:	2598 
Size:	303.8 KB 
ID:	1245344
    This makes so much sense! The same reasoning can be applied to girlfriends.

    26 = ugly
    27.5 = pretty
    29 = beautiful

    The ugly girlfriend just doesn't get you goin'.
    But the pretty girlfriend does!

    However, you can go too far...
    The beautiful girlfriend attracts too many other guys.
    But the pretty girlfriend stays on your arm!

    Proof that the sweet spot is right in the middle, just like the 27.5" wheel.
    Okay where's that rolleyes emoji?
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  138. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation: White7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    This makes so much sense! The same reasoning can be applied to girlfriends
    Proof that the sweet spot is right in the middle, just like the 27.5" wheel.
    Okay where's that rolleyes emoji?
    =sParty


    probably the most sound logic I've ever read on this site,,you have a clarity my friend most of us can only hope for

  139. #139
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,072

    Is 27.5 going the way of the 26

    Perhaps with the “progressive geometry” trend giving wheelbases on par with tandem bikes, the “limitation” of 29er no longer applies.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  140. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    13,208
    The beautiful girlfriend attracts too many other guys

    Sad reasoning for choosing a partner in life.
    It's about what happens between you two. If that's going other guys don't matter.

  141. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    702
    I like 27.5. If I had infinite money, I'd always keep a smaller wheeled bike for screwing around, though I recognize the benefits of the bigger wheels (and as I'm 190cm, I'm tall enough for some of the limitations to be lessened). I might end up with a 26in dirt jumper for that role someday, but we'll see. Right now my 27.5 bike works well for the vast range of things I use it for, so I'm in no hurry to trade it, but I probably would go 29 if I was seeking a "one bike" to replace it.

    At some point, I think there will be a resurgence of jib culture. Right now, I feel like mountain biking has become somewhat serious business. It seems like it's closer to road biking than BMX culture wise (and it makes sense for financial reasons). I could see a resurgence of jibbing/emergence of a more countercultural trend within mountain biking that focuses more on sessioning stuff, etc..

    Ironically, the group that kind of wants to/seems most able to lead this (Ratboy and the 50:01 folks) largely just moved to Cannondale 29ers (though initially at least some of them rode them undersized with 27.5 in wheels). So who knows.

  142. #142
    Bipolar roller
    Reputation: singletrackmack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The next big thing will be 29" front with 27.5" rear. This will keep 27.5" relevant.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    yep. My guess is the indusry will not undercut the current sales bump though. I give it two years before 29'er sales level off, then the indusry will push mixed hard... It will be interesting to see how it all plays out but I would be surprised if mixed isn't the next big push.
    Mixed would be interesting, but as pointed out, mixed wheel size has been tried out many times before pushed by the “industry” and has never caught on for a variety of good reasons. The only place maybe I could see would be DH, but still can’t see it becoming mainstream even there.

    I think we would have seen at least some sort of grass roots interest from mtbrs (like with 650b) by now if it was going to become a “thing” in the near future. Other than a pro DHr or two experimenting, I haven’t heard of anyone interested in mixed wheel size. For example, doesn’t seem to be any interest with mixed wheel size on this website other than here which seems only to be to keep 27.5” alive.
    Get out of the gutter and onto the mountain top.

  143. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by singletrackmack View Post
    Mixed would be interesting, but as pointed out, mixed wheel size has been tried out many times before pushed by the “industry” and has never caught on for a variety of good reasons. The only place maybe I could see would be DH, but still can’t see it becoming mainstream even there.

    I think we would have seen at least some sort of grass roots interest from mtbrs (like with 650b) by now if it was going to become a “thing” in the near future. Other than a pro DHr or two experimenting, I haven’t heard of anyone interested in mixed wheel size. For example, doesn’t seem to be any interest with mixed wheel size on this website other than here which seems only to be to keep 27.5” alive.
    Yes mixed in the past wasn't popular but I see 27/29 making more sense than anythign that's been done in the past. I mean, not everyone likes burn outs on their bungholes. The industry never pushed mixed either. We've had random models here and there that were kind of novelties. When the marketing machine cranks up people will eat it up. Maes is killing it, it's safe to safe some DH'ers will play with it, and like I said, butt buzz is an issue with 29'ers. There are a lot of riders out there that want the speed/rollover of 29'er, but would benefit grately from more crotch clearance.

  144. #144
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,457
    After reading through this thread, I'm going to conclude that wheel size bike sales are dependent on geographical location. Our shop sells 80/20 27.5 over 29ers. We don't stock plus size tires.

    Within 20 miles of us are three bike parks; two of them lift accessed. There's also hundreds of miles of singletrack and not so secret downhill runs that world champions, suspension companies and bike companies test on. Nearly every bike on the back of a car coming up the mountain is 27.5, and as a life long cyclist, I rubber neck every bike I see. Even road bikes.

    I'm 5'11 and don't care for 29ers. The size just doesn't fit my style of riding and the bike I'll be ordering later this month will be 27.5.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  145. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    After reading through this thread, I'm going to conclude that wheel size bike sales are dependent on geographical location. Our shop sells 80/20 27.5 over 29ers. We don't stock plus size tires.

    Within 20 miles of us are three bike parks; two of them lift accessed. There's also hundreds of miles of singletrack and not so secret downhill runs that world champions, suspension companies and bike companies test on. Nearly every bike on the back of a car coming up the mountain is 27.5, and as a life long cyclist, I rubber neck every bike I see. Even road bikes.

    I'm 5'11 and don't care for 29ers. The size just doesn't fit my style of riding and the bike I'll be ordering later this month will be 27.5.
    Can I ask what dream community you reside in

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  146. #146
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Can I ask what dream community you reside in

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Lake Arrowhead, CA in the San Bernardino Mountains. I don't have to drive to Skypark. Snow Valley is on the way to Snow Summit in Big Bear. I forgot to add that Rim Nordic is across the highway from SV where XC and Super D races are held and is considered a bike park also, although natural terrain.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  147. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,411
    Quote Originally Posted by singletrackmack View Post
    Mixed would be interesting, but as pointed out, mixed wheel size has been tried out many times before pushed by the “industry” and has never caught on for a variety of good reasons. The only place maybe I could see would be DH, but still can’t see it becoming mainstream even there.

    I think we would have seen at least some sort of grass roots interest from mtbrs (like with 650b) by now if it was going to become a “thing” in the near future. Other than a pro DHr or two experimenting, I haven’t heard of anyone interested in mixed wheel size. For example, doesn’t seem to be any interest with mixed wheel size on this website other than here which seems only to be to keep 27.5” alive.
    Its because bike company marketing wasn't really pushing it. That could change now with GT and Martin Maes using a 29/275 bike in the EWS. There is also mention of going mixed in world cup DH.

    Liteville has been doing mixed wheel sizes for years...and Foes for the last two or three years.

    If bike companies are trying to find something new to sell you...I'm sure they'll go full force with the mixed wheel marketing...just like the 27.5 and recently with the 29r(again). Lol...probably claim that technology has caught up and can now somehow make some uber superior riding bike.

  148. #148
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    After reading through this thread, I'm going to conclude that wheel size bike sales are dependent on geographical location. Our shop sells 80/20 27.5 over 29ers. We don't stock plus size tires.

    Within 20 miles of us are three bike parks; two of them lift accessed. There's also hundreds of miles of singletrack and not so secret downhill runs that world champions, suspension companies and bike companies test on. Nearly every bike on the back of a car coming up the mountain is 27.5, and as a life long cyclist, I rubber neck every bike I see. Even road bikes.

    I'm 5'11 and don't care for 29ers. The size just doesn't fit my style of riding and the bike I'll be ordering later this month will be 27.5.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Can I ask what dream community you reside in

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Suns-
    Don't let someone else's bike choice prefs or regional popularity surprise/offend you.
    "The Next Big Thing" is often really just marketing hype and sales targeting what they think people ought to buy because they made it and they'd be darn stupid if they got it wrong.

    If you don't want to get it wrong and fully admit you have little faith in accurately targeting the market, you offer and few of these or ALL; 29, 27.5 27.5 plus, fat bikes … the whole shebang!!
    Lots of the premium brands are / have been doing so and even many of the high line stuff can't (won't) chance losing market share by singling out.

    I do believe there are regional preferences in many areas or at least marketing strong enough to result in a majority trend, be it 27 or 29.
    I also believe the traits of some bikes fit with certain characteristics and you might find sales results showing comfort and ride lending itself to older age groups. Plus rigid or h/t get plenty of love from those wanting some compliance in ride and not wanting / needing full sus.
    Some of the touring or bike pack bikes have a more upright geo and 2.8 or plus tires bringing comfort to the long trippers or the aged folk. People need the right thing rather than the next big thing unless it's both.
    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  149. #149
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by tahoebeau View Post
    ^More of an “I told you so”. Not necessarily you, but I thought the introduction of a 3rd wheel size was really stupid and originally brought out as a way to phase out 26” and 29” and make just one wheel size so it’s easier for manufactures to increase efficiencies and profits. That, and all the false advertising about 27.5” put out by manufactures like Giant really annoyed me. So, I am not for less wheel sizes, the exact opposite. I want differentiation and I get more of that with 26” and 29”.

    27.5” killed the 26” and is now itself dying because it is not as good as the 29”. And because of the 27.5” wheel size marketed so heavily as the next standard and killing the 26”, we are now going to be left with only one wheel size.
    ** I missed the story on Giant and it's false advertisings. What exactly did they say ?

    I was in the new bike market -lukewarm- for about two to three years just spying what was new and happening. My then current bikes were a 91 rigid HardRock and a '01 Kona h/t.
    At the time of my reading bike mags, tests and buying guides, everything said about the trail bike geo / bike pack types were really striking a cord with me. I was sold on something like Surly, Jamis or Marin that presented as just all 'rounders for various purpose / terrain and not particularly specialized. Felt very fortunate to take my time perusing and getting to know my options and more about what I expected from the next bike.
    In March of 2017, I went with a locally available choice pleased to support a bike shop and have the local support or service versus limited demo options and mail order. Happy with fit, comfort and performance hitting the mark for what I was looking for.
    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  150. #150
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    14,072
    Mixed wheel size will catch on when someone markets it as “modern progressive”.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    419
    Mixed wheelsizes didn't catch on because the UCI didn't allow it for competition. UCI reversed this ruling in October last year, hence the renewed interest from pro riders and factory teams like Specialized, GT, Polygon. Maes winning 2 successive rounds in the EWS using a 97.5 GT Force will even fuel this interest further.


    The only notable manufacturers in recent years to release mixed-wheelsize bikes were Foes and Liteville. The bikes released by these guys were generally well-received, with one reviewer even calling the Foes Mixer a game-changer.


    It's not for everyone, definitely, but expect more buzz on 97.5 builds in the coming months as results from races appear.

  152. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation: uzurpator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    894
    What I delightful topic and since I'm already here.

    I long time ago stopped caring what the bike-biz does. I happily sit at the bottom of this particular trophic pyramid, eating up gear dropped by people who _just_ need to have the latest gear. I'll happily have 10 high quality bikes from 5 years ago then a single latest/greatest wonder from 5 weeks ago.

    Coincidentally, I just made myself a dual 180mm travel aggresive freeride/enduro rig ( 65* HA and all that jazz ). It turned out that it actually fits 27.5" wheels ( I already had ) with 2.3" tyres - fork and frame alike ( at full compression ). The entire bike cost me less then a new Fox 36 factory fork.

  153. #153
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by uzurpator View Post
    I'll happily have 10 high quality bikes from 5 years ago then a single latest/greatest wonder from 5 weeks ago.
    I guess I'm the opposite, averaging something like a new bike per year for the past 30ish years. Problem is I've got both -- the wonder bike(s) plus the 10 high quality oldies. How can people part with old friends? Meanwhile it's hard to walk through my garage.

    Within my bulging quiver are two mixed wheel bikes (29/26). Won't go into it.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  154. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Lake Arrowhead, CA in the San Bernardino Mountains. I don't have to drive to Skypark. Snow Valley is on the way to Snow Summit in Big Bear. I forgot to add that Rim Nordic is across the highway from SV where XC and Super D races are held and is considered a bike park also, although natural terrain.
    Ironically I used to sell Peterbilts down there in Fontana at Cherry & I-10 and I shopped for my very 1st house in Lake Arrowhead. At that time I hardly knew what a mountain bike was as I was big in to sportbikes. Wish I had known then what I know now.
    I left California for Colorado and then Texas soon after that.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  155. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    I'm very much into the idea of mixed wheel sizes for an aggressive trail bike for my short wife.

    29ers are undeniably more effective at our endless rocks here in Central Texas. But she is just a bit too small to manage a 29er in the rear in my opinion.

    I am imagining something like a 130 trail bike with a 29" upfront and 27" in the rear would be ideal.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  156. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    Quote Originally Posted by bachman1961 View Post
    Suns-
    Don't let someone else's bike choice prefs or regional popularity surprise/offend you.
    "The Next Big Thing" is often really just marketing hype and sales targeting what they think people ought to buy because they made it and they'd be darn stupid if they got it wrong.

    If you don't want to get it wrong and fully admit you have little faith in accurately targeting the market, you offer and few of these or ALL; 29, 27.5 27.5 plus, fat bikes … the whole shebang!!
    Lots of the premium brands are / have been doing so and even many of the high line stuff can't (won't) chance losing market share by singling out.

    I do believe there are regional preferences in many areas or at least marketing strong enough to result in a majority trend, be it 27 or 29.
    I also believe the traits of some bikes fit with certain characteristics and you might find sales results showing comfort and ride lending itself to older age groups. Plus rigid or h/t get plenty of love from those wanting some compliance in ride and not wanting / needing full sus.
    Some of the touring or bike pack bikes have a more upright geo and 2.8 or plus tires bringing comfort to the long trippers or the aged folk. People need the right thing rather than the next big thing unless it's both.
    I realize my statement might have came off like I was being condescending about his community, but I wasn't. Any place with that many trails seems like heaven to me. The fact that it's not hot in Lake Arrowhead makes it even better.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  157. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by bachman1961 View Post
    ** I missed the story on Giant and it's false advertisings. What exactly did they say ?
    Here:

    https://forums.mtbr.com/giant/giants...-a-965870.html

  158. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,792
    My wife has a 27.5 bike, and I have a 29 er. Both have 2.6 tires up front. Her OD on her front is 28", and mine is about 29.25". Truly not that much difference.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  159. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    Liteville has been doing mixed wheel sizes for years...and Foes for the last two or three years.
    Exactly, nothing new. Mixed wheel size has been around since the beginning and throughout, but never catches on to mainstream even when companies like Trek try to push it. The average mountain biker is just not interested in mixed since it is an old concept without that new “tech” factor, has always been available, looks weird and is really only needed to make room for your ass when getting way back for steeps which is something 95% of those who own mtbs will never do or consider doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Verbl Kint View Post
    Mixed wheelsizes didn't catch on because the UCI didn't allow it for competition. UCI reversed this ruling in October last year...

    It's not for everyone, definitely, but expect more buzz on 97.5 builds in the coming months as results from races appear.
    As pointed out, mixed wheels has been around for non-DH bikes well before the UCI changed their rule and never became mainstream. Plus, DH is a small niche within mtb so mixed will be a small niche within a niche. So we may see some mixed in DH, but I doubt it will move into the most popular segments of mtb like trail or XC and therefore will never become mainstream enough to save 27.5” from its inevitable death coming in the next couple of years.

  160. #160
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,060
    650b might fall out of fashion in the world of MTB, but not for its other applications.

  161. #161
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,457
    I mentioned the geographic possibility of the balance of 29/27.5. What about the age groups? Here, I see the younger age groups on 27.5 and older riders on 29. Money is not an issue.

    An analogy may be like surfing where"old guys rule" are out on longboards and younger, fitter surfers are on shortboards, although horses for courses. I'm not saying longboards are a crutch, but they do paddle easier and get into waves easier. I have both but really wont bother paddling out unless there's some power and performance out there. I know, apples to oranges and I'm generalizing, but for the most part, it's true.

    BTW, the term "quiver" for different boards for conditions has been a surfing term since the 60's and adopted by cyclist.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  162. #162
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    I mentioned the geographic possibility of the balance of 29/27.5. What about the age groups? Here, I see the younger age groups on 27.5 and older riders on 29. Money is not an issue.

    An analogy may be like surfing where"old guys rule" are out on longboards and younger, fitter surfers are on shortboards, although horses for courses. I'm not saying longboards are a crutch, but they do paddle easier and get into waves easier. I have both but really wont bother paddling out unless there's some power and performance out there. I know, apples to oranges and I'm generalizing, but for the most part, it's true.

    BTW, the term "quiver" for different boards for conditions has been a surfing term since the 60's and adopted by cyclist.
    I'm fairly oblivious to what others ride- bike or wheel size, can't comment to that for here in CO or Colorado Springs and would just be a limited exposure guess anyways. I'm out when it's pretty quiet and little traffic so other than an occasonal nod or 'hello', I might be able to tell you the color of the bike that just went by.

    Never seen a ref to 'easy wheels' being 275 or 29 but did see some banter about plus size tires/bikes making much of trail rides and conditions easier to handle. Some go as far as to infer plus tire bikes are for people with less ability or riding talent as if they come with training wheels. In some cases, it's difficult to know a post intent. Maybe clever insight's, simply reflect ego, or flag some self appreciating need to post.

    I felt benefit leaps and bounds transitioning to a 15 year newer h/t Plus from a h/t 26'r. Everything about the new bike is better including the fit and I do feel a big part of the experience is plus tires. Few contact points offer real feedback other than saddle, pedals and handgrips. Tires /wheels is what's left !

    As for mention of age, I do think plus tire bikes are finding an strong market or at least happy customers with the older crowd. I believe they come as 29 or 27.5 so I'm not sure the distinction there has any particular relevance other than preference, specific bike build as it comes or sizing properties. Some brands offered (or still do?) tires size choices/same bike and some go by frame size.

    Easier, more capable or not, the suspension afforded by such tires on a rigid or h/t bike is a benefit to the creaky old Me and lets me ride harder and more often with less trouble.
    I'll have just over 2 years to hit the 60 mark and I suspect some of the aches, creaks and soreness I get is par for experiences 'we' put on our own frames over 5 or 6 decades. In fact, I've seen quite a few rider claims by those in mid 40's range commenting favorably on plus comfort getting them "back into the scene".


    ~ b
    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  163. #163
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by tahoebeau View Post
    Thanks for the link. After all the hoopla, I guess I did what a few others did and went demo biking to find out what felt the most fun and capable for me.

    Dr Science be damned !! lol



    Quote Originally Posted by eb1888 View Post
    The beautiful girlfriend attracts too many other guys

    Sad reasoning for choosing a partner in life.
    It's about what happens between you two. If that's going other guys don't matter.
    Aha !!
    Reading between the lines here; "between you two" would still be the middle wheel size !! AMEN

    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  164. #164
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by bachman1961 View Post
    Some go as far as to infer plus tire bikes are for people with less ability or riding talent as if they come with training wheels. In some cases, it's difficult to know a post intent. Maybe clever insight's, simply reflect ego, or flag some self appreciating need to post.
    Can't recall whose MTBR sig says:

    "Making shit harder doesn't make it more awesome, it just makes it... harder."

    Paraphrased from an ever weakening memory but you get the idea.

    With apologies to the MTBR member in question,
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  165. #165
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,457
    Quote Originally Posted by bachman1961 View Post
    I'm fairly oblivious to what others ride- bike or wheel size, can't comment to that for here in CO or Colorado Springs and would just be a limited exposure guess anyways. I'm out when it's pretty quiet and little traffic so other than an occasonal nod or 'hello', I might be able to tell you the color of the bike that just went by.

    Never seen a ref to 'easy wheels' being 275 or 29 but did see some banter about plus size tires/bikes making much of trail rides and conditions easier to handle. Some go as far as to infer plus tire bikes are for people with less ability or riding talent as if they come with training wheels. In some cases, it's difficult to know a post intent. Maybe clever insight's, simply reflect ego, or flag some self appreciating need to post.

    I felt benefit leaps and bounds transitioning to a 15 year newer h/t Plus from a h/t 26'r. Everything about the new bike is better including the fit and I do feel a big part of the experience is plus tires. Few contact points offer real feedback other than saddle, pedals and handgrips. Tires /wheels is what's left !

    As for mention of age, I do think plus tire bikes are finding an strong market or at least happy customers with the older crowd. I believe they come as 29 or 27.5 so I'm not sure the distinction there has any particular relevance other than preference, specific bike build as it comes or sizing properties. Some brands offered (or still do?) tires size choices/same bike and some go by frame size.

    Easier, more capable or not, the suspension afforded by such tires on a rigid or h/t bike is a benefit to the creaky old Me and lets me ride harder and more often with less trouble.
    I'll have just over 2 years to hit the 60 mark and I suspect some of the aches, creaks and soreness I get is par for experiences 'we' put on our own frames over 5 or 6 decades. In fact, I've seen quite a few rider claims by those in mid 40's range commenting favorably on plus comfort getting them "back into the scene".


    ~ b
    At the end of my post I mentioned I was generalizing. It wasn't like I said 29ers were E bikes.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  166. #166
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    Can't recall whose MTBR sig says:

    "Making shit harder doesn't make it more awesome, it just makes it... harder."

    Paraphrased from an ever weakening memory but you get the idea.

    With apologies to the MTBR member in question,
    =sParty
    Yeah, remember seeing that too.
    Never really understood the dynamic of being an educated person who thrives on telling others they are doing it wrong because they have chosen the right tool for the job. In my case, I'd be the last person to gloat about riding ability but definitely compliment the bike for it's effectiveness.
    My perspective isn't likely to be 'the average customer" though. Twenty seven years / 3 bikes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    At the end of my post I mentioned I was generalizing. It wasn't like I said 29ers were E bikes.
    No offense Vader and likewise, I hope you didn't feel targeted. I was sparked to think in general as well since your post bought to mind a few points I've read by others that were generally unfavorable about certain bikes or wheel sizes.
    I'm not at all surprised nor embarrassed the bike I chose makes things click for me and that's really how I justify my spending anyways.
    Your mention of geographic's / wheel size is interesting and I'm sure there is something to it in a lot of areas.
    When I seen "old guys/ young guys", that got me thinking more to the comfort of the plus tires that was a bit of a tag line and drew me into the fold a few years ago, something I see as a common thread among some older riders or those coming back to biking.
    It (Plus bikes) was probably the one realization I came to in deciding full suspension wasn't really needed for my type of riding or comfort. That saved me and easy $1500 alone.
    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  167. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    I mentioned the geographic possibility of the balance of 29/27.5. What about the age groups? Here, I see the younger age groups on 27.5 and older riders on 29. Money is not an issue.

    An analogy may be like surfing where"old guys rule" are out on longboards and younger, fitter surfers are on shortboards, although horses for courses. I'm not saying longboards are a crutch, but they do paddle easier and get into waves easier. I have both but really wont bother paddling out unless there's some power and performance out there. I know, apples to oranges and I'm generalizing, but for the most part, it's true.

    BTW, the term "quiver" for different boards for conditions has been a surfing term since the 60's and adopted by cyclist.
    I have been saying this for years. Mountain biking is aging with a group of riders. That is why e-bikes, if we like them or not, are going to be the next big thing and why bikes can get more expensive as older people can generally afford them.
    It is the Right of the People to Alter or to Abolish It.

  168. #168
    Out spokin'
    Reputation: Sparticus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Posts
    10,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post
    "Making shit harder doesn't make it more awesome, it just makes it... harder."
    Quote Originally Posted by bachman1961 View Post
    Yeah, remember seeing that too.
    Never really understood the dynamic of being an educated person who thrives on telling others they are doing it wrong because they have chosen the right tool for the job.
    Okay, I can't resist arguing against myself now. The exception for me used to be (and remains, to an extent), singlespeeding. I spent a decade riding SS almost exclusively and those were great days. The ubiquitous joke in the SS universe is that one doesn't have to wonder about gearing because they're always in the wrong gear. Does singlespeeding make mountain biking harder? Yes. Does it make it awesome? For some, yes. I loved it. I never felt stronger in my life. I never WAS stronger in my life. I even contested a 100 mile race aboard an SS, it was one of the hardest things -- and one of the most awesome things -- I've ever accomplished aboard a bicycle.

    So there ya have it. Bottom line: to each his own. I don't understand why some riders do certain things (like consider riding White Rim on a cyclocross bike) but it's none of my business. They know what they're about and that's all that matters. What a wonderfully free country we live in. I say do whatever you like and embrace the notion of others doing likewise.

    I bet you feel the same, bachman1961.
    =sParty
    disciplesofdirt.org

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

  169. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by tahoebeau View Post
    Exactly, nothing new. Mixed wheel size has been around since the beginning and throughout, but never catches on to mainstream even when companies like Trek try to push it. The average mountain biker is just not interested in mixed since it is an old concept without that new “tech” factor, has always been available, looks weird and is really only needed to make room for your ass when getting way back for steeps which is something 95% of those who own mtbs will never do or consider doing.



    As pointed out, mixed wheels has been around for non-DH bikes well before the UCI changed their rule and never became mainstream. Plus, DH is a small niche within mtb so mixed will be a small niche within a niche. So we may see some mixed in DH, but I doubt it will move into the most popular segments of mtb like trail or XC and therefore will never become mainstream enough to save 27.5” from its inevitable death coming in the next couple of years.
    Since when has it mattered if something was tried in the past but didn't catch on? We had 30mm internal rims, and 2.6 to 3.0 tires 15 years ago but it didn't stick. Jamis and KHS offered 650b bikes years before it was adopted and no one cared. We had through axles that worked on all 135xQR frames but it still took ages before axles caught on. Just because mixed has been played with but didn't catch on means little. By your reasoning I could say 29'er DH bikes have been done in the past and they didn't catch on. When the industry starts hyping modern, progressive geo, best of both worlds, 27/29 bikes it's game on!

    Where else is the industry headed? New axle standards would start a riot, new wheel size would be laughed at, geo is reaching its limits, motors, electronics, gearboxes, 12 and even 13 gears already here. Mixed is the next logical move for better or worse.

  170. #170
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparticus View Post

    So there ya have it. Bottom line: to each his own. I don't understand why some riders do certain things What a wonderfully free country we live in. I say do whatever you like and embrace the notion of others doing likewise.

    I bet you feel the same, bachman1961.
    =sParty
    Yep !
    Not sure how I missed you ss though and didn't call you out on it !! That's making things harder X 10 .
    Seriously though, that type of grind is an accomplishment and good for you and those wanting to ramp it up for all that work out and strength. It's exactly why I think I want no part of though and most understand we all have our own hot buttons.

    I think much of the pi55ant attitudes we see here at times by some has really helped me come full circle. Now days, I get nothing but a silly grin when I read of others describing their rides or experiences of enjoyment, pics posted or whatever. What they ride is always of interest but I never think about why ..... isn't it just a given they like what they have an it suites them well ?
    That's my read here or on the trails.

    Tubless, rigid, wheel size ? Aren't we just a step away from telling everyone what color their bike MUST BE !!

    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

  171. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mrclortho's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    117
    I've ridden all three wheel sizes for thousands of miles over the last 20 years. It is like the three bears, sort of.

    26ers suck for almost everything, unless you like the feeling of sailing over the handlebars at the smallest of rocks or roots.

    29ers were an over-compensation for the tiny wheels of the 26ers. Yeah, they roll fast, and if you are a racer or 6' tall, then OK, but if you are a normal rider that like to have run, turning and tight stuff are a problem.

    27.5 is just right. You get a large enough wheel to roll over stuff but small enough to be able to actually turn. It is interesting that every feller in my riding group but one has gone to 27.5's these days.
    '18 Scott Spark 730, 27.5+
    '10 Scott Scale 29er

  172. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,534
    Quote Originally Posted by mrclortho View Post
    26ers suck for almost everything, unless you like the feeling of sailing over the handlebars at the smallest of rocks or roots..
    After riding 29ers since 2012, when I get on a 26er it feels like a kids bike. They do kinda suck at everything. How did I ride 26 for so many years?
    Vermonter - bikes, beers and skis.

  173. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Curveball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    3,297
    Quote Originally Posted by VTSession View Post
    After riding 29ers since 2012, when I get on a 26er it feels like a kids bike. They do kinda suck at everything. How did I ride 26 for so many years?
    Keep in mind that most 26ers also have dated geometry compared to modern 27.5 or 29 bikes. It could be the geometry instead of the wheel size that sucks. It's very hard to say for sure though because direct comparison of bikes with similar geometry is very difficult to say the least.
    Riding Washington State singletrack since 1986

  174. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Curveball View Post
    Keep in mind that most 26ers also have dated geometry compared to modern 27.5 or 29 bikes. It could be the geometry instead of the wheel size that sucks. It's very hard to say for sure though because direct comparison of bikes with similar geometry is very difficult to say the least.
    As a beginner I have never ridden 26 but just by looking at my neighbor's 10 year old whimpy carbon 26 and similar old 26 I have seen it's pretty evident wheelsize is the least problem. Besides from skinny tires they look so impossible to ride in every dimension- steep, short, long stem, narrow bar. Crazy dangerous imo and sure enough my neighbor fell two times on a very easy tour.
    I think my xc HT is some aggressive steep whimpy stuff but compared to those old bikes it's nothing.

  175. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by krumme View Post
    As a beginner I have never ridden 26 but just by looking at my neighbor's 10 year old whimpy carbon 26 and similar old 26 I have seen it's pretty evident wheelsize is the least problem. Besides from skinny tires they look so impossible to ride in every dimension- steep, short, long stem, narrow bar. Crazy dangerous imo and sure enough my neighbor fell two times on a very easy tour.
    I think my xc HT is some aggressive steep whimpy stuff but compared to those old bikes it's nothing.
    You are right in that wheel size is pretty insignificant when comparing old to new. Since you are new you probably don't know that 27.5 is marketing BS, 650b is actually 25mm taller or 26.99". Geo is the biggest change by a long shot when comparing old to new. The change to 650b just happend to come with the industry adpoting some of the modifications us old dogs were doing to our 26'ers like using angle sets and off set bushing to go south of 66. When slack hit the mainstream it opened people's eyes, and also fooled many into thinking 1" bigger wheels was some kind of game changer.

  176. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    You are right in that wheel size is pretty insignificant when comparing old to new. Since you are new you probably don't know that 27.5 is marketing BS, 650b is actually 25mm taller...
    Which equates to only 12.5mm more rollover than a 26”. Talk about insignificant....

  177. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tahoebeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by shekky View Post
    out of simple curiosity, are you able to articulate what was cynical about introducing 650b wheels to mountain bikes?
    Cynical: 2. concerned only with one's own interests and typically disregarding accepted or appropriate standards in order to achieve them.

    If companies like Giant pushed 27.5” simply to make it so there is only one wheel size so they can improve efficiencies and increase profits (which I believe they did) then, by definition, it was a cyclical move.

  178. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,404
    Quote Originally Posted by shekky View Post
    out of simple curiosity, are you able to articulate what was cynical about introducing 650b wheels to mountain bikes? 650b wheels which have actually been around quite awhile?
    There was no real reason to. You have a difference of about 12.5mm from that of 26" wheels. I realise 650B has been around a long time. 29ers offered a fairly easily felt difference. Whereas 650B (the ones I've ridden) are no different to 26"

    I'm sure the industry could have quite happily existed with 26 and 29.

  179. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    You are right in that wheel size is pretty insignificant when comparing old to new. Since you are new you probably don't know that 27.5 is marketing BS, 650b is actually 25mm taller or 26.99". Geo is the biggest change by a long shot when comparing old to new. The change to 650b just happend to come with the industry adpoting some of the modifications us old dogs were doing to our 26'ers like using angle sets and off set bushing to go south of 66. When slack hit the mainstream it opened people's eyes, and also fooled many into thinking 1" bigger wheels was some kind of game changer.
    I have only ridden 10 months so yeaa the hype for 27.5 didn't hit me the slightest. I was hit by 29 and 2.6 tires being the holy grail of sweet spot.

    If we disregard industry push for selling new stuff besides for pure xc and plus 6 riders I think 29 is born out of the same thinking as 26 weight obsession was. Fast a to b. It's not like weight doesn't matter. I do pay a lot for it. And sure wheelsize between 27 and 29 can be felt even if it's only 25mm rollover.
    But coming from alpine skiing this obsession on mtb that there is one right size for all is just insane. Be it xc or enduro if a long Pole machine or SC xc ht carbon whimp 69.5 is compared to skiing it's the equivalent of saying all should ride some stiff racing ski optimised for speed. If ski folks watch mtb discussion about wheelsize they would think we were crazy.

    Imagine going on the alpine piste with the obsession of going as fast from a to b. Its utter meaningless for most. Mtb industry and reviewers should stop being so categorical about what is right for everyone and every situation. And that there is a sweet spot. The most idiotic idea created ever. Is there a sweet spot to ride and .. sweet people? The entire thought is sad.


    We should have bike for different purposes and temper. That includes everything from geo to wheelsize. I have 2.1 to 2.8 tires. 27 and 29. I slacked out my short xc ht to 67.5 but my longish genius tuned is what 65. Different bikes with multiple different wheel sets for different trails and purpose. Different fun.

    Now if people have less funds I urge them to get on the bike and ride what they do most and select what gives them the biggest smile. We only have one life.

  180. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,411
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    You are right in that wheel size is pretty insignificant when comparing old to new. Since you are new you probably don't know that 27.5 is marketing BS, 650b is actually 25mm taller or 26.99". Geo is the biggest change by a long shot when comparing old to new. The change to 650b just happend to come with the industry adpoting some of the modifications us old dogs were doing to our 26'ers like using angle sets and off set bushing to go south of 66. When slack hit the mainstream it opened people's eyes, and also fooled many into thinking 1" bigger wheels was some kind of game changer.
    IMO...this is what I think made the big difference. The slack head angle reduced the feeling of going over the bar...regardless of how big your wheels are.

    I still have my 2010 Pivot Mach 5. From day one...that bike always made me feel like I was sitting on top of the bike. It always made me feel like I was on the verge of going OTB. I just stopped riding it. It sat for a while. Then I got a longer travel fork...and switched the stock 90mm stem for a 50mm one. It really changed the way the bike descended...but the with the short and steep geo...the changes also made the bike climb real bad. Man...that bike got so many good reviews back then. Compared to my Spitfire...that Mach 5 is like a death machine. Both 140mm trail bikes...but light years apart in the way the bikes ride.

  181. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,716
    Geometry is king. If I could get another 50mm of reach on my 26" bike it could hold up very well with modern bikes. But that short reach kills it in flat corners compared to more modern geometry.

    I think you'll see more bikes going towards 27.5+ & 29" compatibility. The industry is progressing considerably faster than it has in the past... From 2005-2012 it was essentially just rinse & repeat. New color, add 5-10mm every 3-5 years, call it progress.

    Within the last 6 years it seams there are more organized mountain bike communities, & non & for profit groups. This has increased the amount of more modern trails by a significant margin. Add that to the fact that mountain bikes are also much more durable & capable, you've got many more riders purchasing many more bikes at a significantly higher price than before. More money gets pushed into the industry, more money for development & design = many more standards in the last 6 years than in the previous 2 decades.

    Worry not my friends, industry standards will continue to change & even the 29'rs will be left behind. As growth slows logic will prevail & we'll come to our senses. 99% of the time it's the rider, not the bike. Sure you might be able to shave a few seconds here and there going to a big wheeled rig, but depending on the trail, is the overall experience better? Or is it the shiny new toy and or guilt from spending $5k that is motivating that extra effort & enthusiasm.

    The mountain bike industry will have more than enough motivation to keep producing great gear to keep your antiquated rig running. Tires, gears, knick-nacks & components won't be in short supply for decades.

    If you love mountain biking you better get used to the fact that from now on, industry progression is king. But fear not, advertisements will always claim what you're currently riding is behind the times... even in some cases days after you purchase your beautiful new steed.

    Keep in mind they've been successfully progressing the game of golf (stick hits ball that goes in hole) for 562 years & managed to turn it into a 70 billion dollar a year industry. Mountain bikes have officially only been around for 41 years.

    If they can't perfect a golf club over 500 years where do you think that leaves your new bike? With that said, get out & ride! Your bike is good enough, you however may want to ride for another hour & tackle that hill you hate so much. Every ride.

    In the end for 99% of riders your fitness & familiarity with your bike & trails will be holding you back more any new standard ever will.
    83 Ritchey Everest
    95 Bianchi Mega Tube ti
    2015 Kona Operator Supreme
    2015 Kona Process 153
    2019 Kona Process 153 CR 29

  182. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,404
    Quote Originally Posted by krumme View Post
    As a beginner I have never ridden 26 but just by looking at my neighbor's 10 year old whimpy carbon 26 and similar old 26 I have seen it's pretty evident wheelsize is the least problem. Besides from skinny tires they look so impossible to ride in every dimension- steep, short, long stem, narrow bar.
    I have a 2006 Enduro (not my main bike) that has wide bars, short stem, sticky tires and a 150mm of travel. Head angle is around 67 degrees. It's as fast as anything modern.

  183. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    321

    Is 27.5 going the way of the 26

    I’m thinking of going to 650b from 29 for full suspension, for what I hope aren’t stupid reasons.
    With the 29er on steep stuff and getting over stuff, like large logs, the rear wheel hits my ass and when the rear suspension compresses while the saddle is dropped the rear tire hits my “dropper compatible” saddle bag and is wearing holes in it.
    I’m 5’8” with a 31” inseam and am thinking that I’m on the verge of being too short for FS 29ers.
    No problem on my rigid 29er, probably due to no rear suspension compression.

  184. #184
    Enthusiast
    Reputation: JonathanGennick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,359
    Quote Originally Posted by CGrr View Post
    I’m 5’8” with a 31” inseam and am thinking that I’m on the verge of being too short for FS 29ers.
    Your reasons are valid. If you can find a 650b bike that allows use of the dropper without your backside rubbing the wheel, then how can anyone fault you for preferring that bike? And fwiw, I am just under 5' 9", and I feel like I'm a better match for 650b tires than 29er ones. I can go either way, but for any sort of aggressive riding I hands-down prefer the smaller of the two wheel sizes.

  185. #185
    the half breed devil
    Reputation: shekky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    4,060
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudguard View Post
    There was no real reason to. You have a difference of about 12.5mm from that of 26" wheels. I realise 650B has been around a long time. 29ers offered a fairly easily felt difference. Whereas 650B (the ones I've ridden) are no different to 26"

    I'm sure the industry could have quite happily existed with 26 and 29.
    fair enough.

    but that's not cynicism.

  186. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mudguard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,404
    Quote Originally Posted by shekky View Post
    fair enough.

    but that's not cynicism.
    The cynical part is the industry knew people would buy a whole new bike quicker if forks, tyres and rims became hard to get.

  187. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    160
    650b is officially dead since last year.
    I believe it was only introduced as a intermediate step from 26 to 29 because many people were unwilling to go to 29 back in time. I think mostly only because of how
    bad 29 looked 5 years ago.
    For industry its a pain to have multiple wheel sizes and look how small the MTB sector is.
    Also they name it 27,5 on purpose so people think it will be right between 26 and 29 which is BS.
    The bad thing is that i like 650b the most and almost be force to change wheels in future because there will be less and less parts available.

  188. #188
    Up In Smoke
    Reputation: Train Wreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,546
    Quote Originally Posted by x-rated View Post
    650b is officially dead since last year.
    .

    I must be living under a rock

  189. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    160
    people are even afraid to buy 650b because they think its obsolete. In bike shops they got still 650b...



















    for kids.

  190. #190
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,900
    This thread is bananas. If anything "officially" died, it's wheelsize debate - and a lot longer than last year.
    Working to stomp out redundancy, I repeat, working to stomp out redundancy.

  191. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EatsDirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by x-rated View Post
    many people were unwilling to go to 29 back in time
    I'd definitely ride a 29 for the opportunity tell my younger self to get a better education and become a dentist.

  192. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Mega View Post
    This thread is bananas. If anything "officially" died, it's wheelsize debate - and a lot longer than last year.
    get a banana phone to call back them 2014 bikes

  193. #193
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,900
    Quote Originally Posted by x-rated View Post
    get a banana phone to call back them 2014 bikes
    you're a bit...exhausting. new to bikes?
    Working to stomp out redundancy, I repeat, working to stomp out redundancy.

  194. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Meeners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    169
    Worst thread of the year.

  195. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation: UEDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    305
    You guys are behind in the times. 29 is dead. 29+ is the new hotness.

  196. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Mega View Post
    This thread is bananas. If anything "officially" died, it's wheelsize debate - and a lot longer than last year.
    Oh, but you're wrong! There was only a pause in the wheel war when the industry had us convinced 650b was the perfect compromise. Now we are told 29" is plenty agile and 650b is slow. 650b proponents use the same arguments 26'ers used in 2014. Nothing has changed, we have come full circle back to 26 vs 29 only now it's 26.99.

    The qustion is just how much of the market will 29" take? Just imagine how much of the market 26" would fill if 650b never happend. That's where 650b is headed. I beleive 650b will fill an even smaller percentage of the market because when it was just 26 and 29, 26" sales were horrible even when 29'ers only existed in the xc/trail markets. Now 29'ers are offered in all markets other than those still dominated by 26.

  197. #197
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,900
    ^If you're interested in this, that's fine. I've been in this for 35 years; I've seen foundational products die quickly and unceremoniously & once out-of-vogue, untouchable products rise from the ashes. From a long view, its mostly a huge distraction but fine if you have sense of objective detachment from it all. Most the blather *here* on wheelsize can be distilled to this: someone bought a new bike, had to make a wheelsize decision - then they are validating & broadcasting their choice by citing performance or being future proof or whatever makes them feel better.

    If you have a stake or interest in "will 29er capture more market share in this sub-segment?" - again that's fine. If you are evaluating performance choices for your specific use-case, again, that's fine. But talk of obsolescence or hyperbole around 'better' is bonkers. There are immutable physics around how different wheelsizes behave & how they can be implemented plus so many variables in riding preferences that make absolute declarations a dead end conversation.

    This conversation is already exhausted and meme-tired hence the "pick a wheelsize and be a d1ck about it". Few lay-people have any insight beyond their nose so almost the motivation to dust this topic off is self-serving or just trying to be provocative.
    Working to stomp out redundancy, I repeat, working to stomp out redundancy.

  198. #198
    sluice box
    Reputation: Co-opski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    975
    Just buy what Rivendell was making 5 years ago and you will be good.
    ptarmigan hardcore

  199. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EatsDirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by slimat99 View Post
    Oh, but you're wrong! There was only a pause in the wheel war when the industry had us convinced 650b was the perfect compromise. Now we are told 29" is plenty agile and 650b is slow. 650b proponents use the same arguments 26'ers used in 2014. Nothing has changed, we have come full circle back to 26 vs 29 only now it's 26.99.

    The qustion is just how much of the market will 29" take? Just imagine how much of the market 26" would fill if 650b never happend. That's where 650b is headed. I beleive 650b will fill an even smaller percentage of the market because when it was just 26 and 29, 26" sales were horrible even when 29'ers only existed in the xc/trail markets. Now 29'ers are offered in all markets other than those still dominated by 26.
    Wheel war? "We are told"?

    Seems there are a lot of sheeple riding bikes these days...

  200. #200
    Co Springs
    Reputation: bachman1961's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,361
    Quote Originally Posted by x-rated View Post
    650b is officially dead since last year.
    I believe it was only introduced as a intermediate step from 26 to 29 because many people were unwilling to go to 29 back in time. I think mostly only because of how
    bad 29 looked 5 years ago.
    For industry its a pain to have multiple wheel sizes and look how small the MTB sector is.
    Also they name it 27,5 on purpose so people think it will be right between 26 and 29 which is BS.
    The bad thing is that i like 650b the most and almost be force to change wheels in future because there will be less and less parts available.
    You may just want to change your tactic on searching the net or shopping but I do not know where you live so that may be a factor too.

    I do not know anyone who has preferred to go that wheel size and had trouble finding or getting what they want so that's my frame of reference.
    "Before you criticize, you should walk a mile in their shoes. You'll be a mile away from them and you have their shoes"

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The way things were, and the way they are now
    By Hawgzilla in forum Off Camber (off topic)
    Replies: 111
    Last Post: 07-07-2014, 11:00 PM
  2. Traveling St Louis to Iowa City... Trails along the way... Some what along the way
    By impdude in forum Midwest - IL, IN, OH, KY, IA, MO, MI
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-17-2013, 05:16 PM
  3. Cost of building your own wheels is way way up!
    By lucifer in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-20-2011, 07:28 AM
  4. Way to go USAC, Way to go...
    By COLINx86 in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-22-2011, 10:12 AM
  5. which way do i go? which way do i go?
    By jimbonerz28 in forum 27.5
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-28-2011, 09:30 AM

Members who have read this thread: 35

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.