Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Wheel Diameter to Human Sizing

Jump to Latest
21 - 40 of 72 Posts
#21 ·
I fixed the neighbor girls 16" wheel bike years ago, and explained that I never wrench on something without riding it a bit to double check it.

Talk about 'flickable'. :thumbsup:

I can see SV's point though, it was a little bit cramped in the ol' cockpit.
Maybe with a longer top tube I could ride a 16" comfortably?
 
#22 ·
Lots of 6' plus guys riding 20" wheels. Terrain has as much to do with wheelsize as height. Geometry also matters. I'm a 6' 3" male. Maybe I should be driving a big ole' suv instead of my little S10. Doesn't matter that I need gas mileage more than 3 rows of seats.

Forget wheelsize, find a bike you like, and just ride the damn thing. Don't try to convince people they need your bike. Don't waste your time justifying your preferences to people that don't want your opinion, anyway. If people would just ride some bikes and be honest about their intentions and limitations, then everybody would be happy on a bike.
 
#23 ·
SV11 said:
This is the biggest load of tripe I"ve ever come across. Wheel size has nothing to do with human sizing, not now not ever.
So if you want a 26er you'd find it most comfortable if you're under 5"5?
Wheel size has everything to do with discipline and nothing to do with "human sizing".
I wonder why shorter road riders don't feel more comfy on smaller wheels, hmmm why do all the tdf riders ride on similar size wheels?
My mate is 6"4 riders 26ers, larger wheels isn't going to make him feel more comfier, the correct frame size will.
Your post is blatantly biased towards 650b, you don't have to be a genius to realize it.
Click to expand...
We're just discussing bicycles, and you have a differing opinion. There's really no need to be a jerk about it.
 
#24 ·
I'd say the OP is generally speaking correct, but in my personal experience, I haven't seen the benefit of going to 650b from a 26er. There just isn't enough of a size difference for me. I can't feel any benefit as far as rollover, climbing ability, traction or otherwise. So I just kept the 26er wheelsize and upgraded to carbon rims. That was actually a far more noticeable difference to me.
 
#25 ·
I think the analogy to kids' bikes isn't very strong. When we're growing up, it's physically impossible to build a small enough frame that would fit big wheels.

Once we reach a certain height and various "adult bikes" are available in our size, the choice of wheel size no longer is dictated by our lack of height, but we are free to choose depending on 1) where we ride and 2) how we ride.

So if you're tall enough to fit yourself on a small 29er, chances are it will be a good bike for you. Depends on what you're going to do with it. On the other hand I at 189 cm with a 92 cm inseam (6'2" / 36") could see myself on a bike with 559 mm wheels if the discipline requires.

In other words, I don't see the connection between wheel size and person height. The bike (size) must fit you and the wheel size should fit your terrain and riding style.
 
#26 ·
Saul Lumikko said:
I think the analogy to kids' bikes isn't very strong. When we're growing up, it's physically impossible to build a small enough frame that would fit big wheels.

Once we reach a certain height and various "adult bikes" are available in our size, the choice of wheel size no longer is dictated by our lack of height, but we are free to choose depending on 1) where we ride and 2) how we ride.

So if you're tall enough to fit yourself on a small 29er, chances are it will be a good bike for you. Depends on what you're going to do with it. On the other hand I at 189 cm with a 92 cm inseam (6'2" / 36") could see myself on a bike with 559 mm wheels if the discipline requires.

In other words, I don't see the connection between wheel size and person height. The bike (size) must fit you and the wheel size should fit your terrain and riding style.
Click to expand...
A person that's 5'2" would have a hard time getting a 29er to fit them well from a race bike perspective. A casual trail rider that's 5'2" could probably ride a small 29er, but it would look weird, just like a XL bike with 26" wheels looks weird.

I myself am 5'8", ride a medium, but ride with a stem with -10 degree drop, and have a hard time finding a 29er that fits me well.
 
#27 ·
Saul Lumikko said:
I think the analogy to kids' bikes isn't very strong. When we're growing up, it's physically impossible to build a small enough frame that would fit big wheels.

Once we reach a certain height and various "adult bikes" are available in our size, the choice of wheel size no longer is dictated by our lack of height, but we are free to choose depending on 1) where we ride and 2) how we ride.

So if you're tall enough to fit yourself on a small 29er, chances are it will be a good bike for you. Depends on what you're going to do with it. On the other hand I at 189 cm with a 92 cm inseam (6'2" / 36") could see myself on a bike with 559 mm wheels if the discipline requires.

In other words, I don't see the connection between wheel size and person height. The bike (size) must fit you and the wheel size should fit your terrain and riding style.
Click to expand...
If I ever meet Saul his drink of choice is on me.
 
#28 ·
At 5'5" I find 29ers need a lot more leverage to throw around, even at the proper size frame.
However, I think it's more a matter of weight, not size. Wheels are a big part of a bike's mass, and for the same material and price bigger equals heavier. When that weight increase is placed at the extreme ends of a bike, it severely affects handling.

The geometry of course is another issue. High stack, long chainstays don't do me any favors.
 
#30 ·
SV11 said:
It's called Marketing, these same companies would lead you to believe that they have reinvented the wheel. Bike sizing is what the world goes by, not wheel size in regards to the proper size bike.

Different wheel sizes relates to the discipline. The smoother and flatter the terrain then larger wheels are the go, eg..TDF, XC. They roll faster.

Smaller wheels are better at changing direction quicker and more nimble, good for technical descents. Size of the person riding has no part to play when choosing wheels.

In relation to technical descents, the 26 is faster than either, a bit of researching also states similar results.
Click to expand...
^^^^ always some uneducated dude with an attitude ruining useful and otherwise good threads.

If wheel size vs human size didn't matter than why are major brands doing just that. SMART WHEEL SIZE.

ITS NOT AN END ALL RULE. With everything in mtbing there are preferences for riding style. But simple science (mainly physics) shows larger wheel is better because it brings pivot point closer to body COG. Smaller wheel size for smaller people is for the simple matter of a 6'2 190lb person has far more leg strength than someone 5'2 110lbs. Bigger wheel, more power needed to turn that wheel to accelerate and maintain.

But again ITS NOT AN END ALL RULE to chill out dude. Its just a good rule of thumb.
 
#31 ·
Saul Lumikko said:
I think the analogy to kids' bikes isn't very strong. When we're growing up, it's physically impossible to build a small enough frame that would fit big wheels.

Once we reach a certain height and various "adult bikes" are available in our size, the choice of wheel size no longer is dictated by our lack of height, but we are free to choose depending on 1) where we ride and 2) how we ride.
Click to expand...
Easy for you to say, you're 6'4".
Some of us never reach that "certain height" (inseam length, really).

Saul Lumikko said:
So if you're tall enough to fit yourself on a small 29er, chances are it will be a good bike for you.
Click to expand...
The cockpit may be too short on a small, for those of us with short legs and a longer torso (like me).
 
#32 ·
I've always been a little underwhelmed by the difference wheelsize makes. My experience is that the overall design of the bike makes much more of a difference. 4 or 5 years ago some of the 29ers I tried did feel sluggish and hard to turn, but my Karate Monkey has always felt lively and responsive. Sure enough no one is currently making 29ers based on enlarged 26er geometry anymore.
Likewise I've been hugely impressed with how well I can climb with my 27.5 Nomad compared to similar travel 26ers of yesteryear. But I strongly suspect this is more to do with overall improvements in design: suspension, geometry etc than an inherently better wheelsize.

As wheelsize increases then the minimum frame / bike size without compromising the design (slacken the head tube, lengthening the stays etc) is going to increase but I see 5' 4 / 5"" riders ripping it up on 29ers, that appear to fit them well.
I prefer how the KM handles to my old 26" Epic (or the nomad) on the mixed terrain bikepacking trips I do (flowing single track, 4WD fire road, poor condition tarmac etc). The Nomad is way better than both on techy steep stuff, no surprise there.

I understand the physics behind the claimed differences between 26 and 29 but my personal experience / suspicion is that wheelsize is pretty minor when compared in isolation to the overall design of a bike.
 
#33 ·
turbogrover said:
A person that's 5'2" would have a hard time getting a 29er to fit them well from a race bike perspective. A casual trail rider that's 5'2" could probably ride a small 29er, but it would look weird, just like a XL bike with 26" wheels looks weird.

I myself am 5'8", ride a medium, but ride with a stem with -10 degree drop, and have a hard time finding a 29er that fits me well.
Click to expand...
If that is the case then why does my 5'0 tall friend who raced in the 24 hr worlds in scotland last year race a 29er?

And why do I at 5'8 dislike them?

There is way too much gray area depending on the specific bike and personal preferences to stuff people on one wheel size or another based upon their height.

Some bike companies do not change wheel size based on size. Scott, for example, gives you a choice of wheel size for most bikes.
 
#34 ·
I'm ~ 6'3" so I'm already on Large or Extra Large frames. I don't really want a 29'er because (for any given suspension design) larger wheels mean a longer wheelbase.

I know some companies have done some impressive engineering in order to minimise chainstay length on their 29ers but they're still longer than 27.5" and 26" bikes.
 
#35 ·
I rode my 29er for a couple hours yesterday. The new wheels I bought rock. The weather in my region has been kind of a bummer for the ski season, but a bit milder than often, which means I get to ride. :D Wasn't so good today, or at least looked bad, so I rode my trainer and watched The Fifth Element.

It seems like these threads come up during this part of the year a lot. People have too much time to think.

My take on this stuff is that is that if I look at road bikes, which have been evolving longer than mountain bikes, the wheel size is pretty much the biggest that fits under the head tube on a bike for a man a bit below average size in a pretty compact riding position. Basically, something that is a problem for a small enough minority to write off. Sucks for that minority, though.

26" wheels on mountain bikes are kind of a historical accident. Cruisers had them when people started cannibalizing them for klunkers. I'm glad the industry is experimenting now, curious to see where it goes, and even more entrenched in my idea not to buy upgrades that I need to put on the next bike to feel okay about paying for.

I have a lot of sympathy with the idea that the size of the rider should drive wheel size. But there are too many small women who shred on 29" bikes for me to say they're wrong. And if a big dude who's got some saddle time on a few different bikes tells me he likes his 26" wheels better, same-same. I do notice a lot of correlation to people's riding disciplines. And, I don't think it's entirely driven by the availability of high-end bikes for those disciplines, because one can still find 26" XC bikes and fairly AM 29ers.

It's really an optimization problem. I don't think XC riders give up anything until the wheel size messes with their riding positions. I've got a -17 stem and just stuck a -5 mm bar on my bike, though with the low risers it shipped with, I was still pretty content. I would have lived with the slight compromise in my position for how smooth my bike is. But it's only got 100 mm of travel. If I was trying to fit more fork and more tire clearance in there, maybe I'd feel different.

People who spend a lot of time in the air can benefit from a more compact bike. But they can also benefit from plusher suspension, and everybody likes a smoother ride. But wheels are unsprung weight... So they've got a couple options that kind of interfere with each other. That's a much tougher problem. And the reality is that people have different priorities from one another. One of my coworkers (I'm an engineer too) commented that "There is no global optimum." That's why we can never really agree on wheel sizes.

I don't imagine the sizes are going to get sliced any finer than they have been. I already can't tell 650B from 29". But I'm definitely curious to see where this goes in five years. My prediction is that 29ers survive and the industry abandons one of the other two. Right now, I guess that looks like 26", which would be a little sad because I still like my 26" hardtail too.
 
#38 · (Edited)
tigris99 said:
Bigger wheel, more power needed to turn that wheel to accelerate and maintain.
Click to expand...
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, so far you are proving the opposite, it seems that you are making things up as you go.
I've asked for third party tests and so far no one has stepped up.
Here's an interesting third party vid, the findings and studies of the test are not news to anyone.

Start the vid from 5:50

P.S That vid does crush a lot of myths associated with different sizes, again it's not news to me.
 
#40 ·
turbogrover said:
A casual trail rider that's 5'2" could probably ride a small 29er, but it would look weird, just like a XL bike with 26" wheels looks weird.
Click to expand...
If the primary concern is to "not look weird", in that case going for smaller wheels on smaller frames and larger wheels on larger frames is a good idea.

If the primary concern is to ride the way you like, it'll be a really good idea to test various wheel sizes and see how they work for you.

Thanks for the offer, Thegweed! I'll have to plan a trip to Scotland then? ;)
 
21 - 40 of 72 Posts
About this Discussion
71 Replies
35 Participants
Last post:
Axe
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
534K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion