Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

What are vintage 26" MTBs still good for?

1 reading
Jump to Latest
381 - 400 of 603 Posts
#382 · (Edited)
Varaxis said:
When compared to fully equipped 29ers, these simpler 26ers flatter a rider's fitness in a very dramatic way. If someone thought shedding weight through lighter tires and wheels on their 29er transformed their experience, these 26ers do that even more. These things zoom, and it's a hoot of an experience.

It comes at the cost of all sorts of technical prowess, that calls for rider skill to compensate for, though. Hence, why some actually recommend it to newbies looking to learn, as opposed to newbies looking to "pay2win" by getting a bike that makes the technical trails a lot easier (where paying more addresses fitness anxiety).

That said, if technical trails are not your bread and butter, a 26" might actually be a good choice. The main thing holding back 26" is their lack of modern support through suspension, wheels, and tires. I'd argue that before they went obsolete, there were many examples of very balanced/dialed geo, but with shorter wheelbase (crazy flickability, though). Nothing stopping someone from installing 27.5 forks and front wheels either.
Click to expand...
I second all of this. It's so much easier to manipulate a smaller bike and it can often times be more fun. I think riders both experienced and new can enjoy 26ers in their own way. The only thing I'd say is that the limitations of a 26er (especially vintage) are very apparent and the smaller wheels take more energy to keep rolling. A smaller wheel is great where quick acceleration is needed and where the trail narrows but you do have to work harder on steady climbs.
 
#383 ·
slidey said:
I second all of this. It's so much easier to manipulate a smaller bike and it can often times be more fun. I think riders both experienced and new can enjoy 26ers in their own way. The only thing I'd say is that the limitations of a 26er (especially vintage) are very apparent and the smaller wheels take more energy to keep rolling. A smaller wheel is great where quick acceleration is needed and where the trail narrows but you do have to work harder on steady climbs.
Click to expand...
The flick ability is an eye-opener after having spent a lot of time on a 29er and going back to 26er. 29ers keep momentum up better, but not on steady climbs. Maybe to get over short technical sections, but that’s it.
 
#385 ·
Zeekrider said:
The vintage 26" is incredibly "flick-able", with the smaller frame, smaller wheels, steeper head tube angle... dramatically nimble and quick compared to a modern 29er. But obviously not as suitable for fast and rough/chunky terrain.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but just think if you had a 26er with modern geo, wide bar, and short stem. I think that would be fun.
 
#386 ·
Shawn in da Canyon said:
The flick ability is an eye-opener after having spent a lot of time on a 29er and going back to 26er. 29ers keep momentum up better, but not on steady climbs. Maybe to get over short technical sections, but that’s it.
Click to expand...
For super steep climbs a smaller wheel is definitely easier to keep moving, but for most climbs I find a 29er or even a 27.5er makes easier work of the hill altogether if you're riding at a good pace. But you definitely need a very short gear for the climb and a pretty small front chain ring. For a 29er that might be 28-30T up front.
 
#387 ·
Yea, 26" definitely makes you feel like you're hitting your limits at a speed lower than what 29ers can comfortable ride at in the rough. The good thing is that you don't need as much fitness to reach this.

With 26" on tech climbs, I find that you just have to attack harder than you think. It feels sooooo good when you finally clear some hill that's been your nemesis, that you know you can do (at least on other bikes). I did the whole arm pump bicep flex pose the last time I tried to do a steep, loose and dusty climb that had all sorts of grooves and a turn or two. I was tucked so far forward that my knees were close to banging into my chest, trying to keep weight balanced well enough between the tire contact points to be stable.
 
Discussion starter · #389 ·
Userbike said:
I rode my Cannondale F2000 around town and it was pretty dangerous. It needs a much shorter stem, wider bars, disc brake conversion, and a new fork because the Rockshox Judy has zero damping.
Click to expand...
I like the early 2K bikes that came with Avid BB7 discs. Those bikes would have solid wheels and forks since that was upper mid level at the time. Metallic pads, and Shimano Icetech rotors ( trim the tab on the inner pad) really help. You can go nuts on the cables later. I did a DB conversion once. I had to throw 1/2 the bike away to do it. The RS Judy forks were pretty much crap except the oil and coil Judy XC, or a couple very rare coil and oil Metro GPS 60mm street forks that were based on it (Europa, and Serra). There were some nice Marzocchi Bomber 80mm forks too. If you had a rim brake 700c with a skimpy hybrid fork it would be crap too.
 
Discussion starter · #392 ·
PuddleDuck said:
the ability to generate conflict on bike forums?
Click to expand...
Ii started this thread wondering what current thinking in MTB circles is on this topic. I'm mostly urban Ebike, and was looking to find orphaned 26" donor bikes.
28k views later the response has been almost universally positive about these bikes. So not to start a conflict, just to see what happened to them.
 
Discussion starter · #393 ·
Zeekrider said:
For fear of being stranded, I am running Tannus Armour inserts in the Contis. Not sure how they are impacting the ride as I've not ridden these Contis without Armour, but I am much more confident that I am not likely to get stranded by a flat.
Click to expand...
I replied to this earlier, but forgot to mention the main feature of the Effetto Mariposa Caffelatex sealer. It foams up inside the tire as you ride. So no special dance ritual to seal up the sidewalls and bead area of the tires. Someone sent me a liter of it by mistake when I ordered some of their drip wax. It seems to work OK.
 
#394 ·
William P said:
Ii started this thread wondering what current thinking in MTB circles is on this topic. I'm mostly urban Ebike, and was looking to find orphaned 26" donor bikes.
28k views later the response has been almost universally positive about these bikes. So not to start a conflict, just to see what happened to them.
Click to expand...
Hi William, I wasn’t specifically referring to you - please accept my apologies.

My comment was an abstracted one, a parody of how in some threads on specific topics (where chain lube is also a classic one), the topic is about eg: 27.5, and somebody or some people do what we humans do, and interject with thoughts that no-one asked for eg a blanket statement that 26 or 39 is better.

It was also a parody of how we humans can’t always accept each others opinions, or won’t consider that another viewpoint exists, or that other people have different preferences & priorities. Another classic example of that is when someone mentions easy gears, and the ‘I only need 32x42’, or ‘why don’t you train more’ brigade show up.
 
#395 ·
PuddleDuck said:
Hi William, I wasn’t specifically referring to you - please accept my apologies.

My comment was an abstracted one, a parody of how in some threads on specific topics (where chain lube is also a classic one), the topic is about eg: 27.5, and somebody or some people do what we humans do, and interject with thoughts that no-one asked for eg a blanket statement that 26 or 39 is better.

It was also a parody of how we humans can’t always accept each others opinions, or won’t consider that another viewpoint exists, or that other people have different preferences & priorities. Another classic example of that is when someone mentions easy gears, and the ‘I only need 32x42’, or ‘why don’t you train more’ brigade show up.
Click to expand...
Around 25 years ago on this site, the Friday question was "To grease the square taper on BB spindles or not"?

It was a running joke with someone starting a new thread every week but would whip everyone into a frenzy
 
#400 · (Edited)
Shawn in da Canyon said:
You can’t get that **** off anything!
Click to expand...
Risky proposition to convert your non-modern setup to tubeless with that. Imagine if your setup blows a bead and that stuff sprays everywhere.

I read somewhere that a tubeless-ready standard was created around 2018, and anything before that was a crap shoot. I can't seem to find the article, but it went into how all the tire and rim makers got together to discuss a standard. I recall Stan's had figured much of it out and refused to share their research, until the very end when it was too late, and the group had already settled on something. In other words, "Tubeless Ready" is an actual industry standard. I think it was "BRAIN" article that was lost from the Outside takeover.
 
381 - 400 of 603 Posts
About this Discussion
602 Replies
116 Participants
Last post:
gary_5622
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