[edmodasvirgens]

I think the post is more like: why do you still ride 26? we can´t bring a war 26x 650 or 29er because everyone here might have a 26er, look at her and say: I cant sell you, you are so fun. Even when you already ride bigger wheels just because you´ve got a superstar new bike and she was not available in 26 size. Your wife look at you and demands the 26er to be sold but you resist, because it is more than a bike. You know you still can rip on her and await for the day that you will be so fit that you will get her and go faster than everyone else, or on that day that you know you don´t need to go fast and want have fun, even if this day will not happen in an year time, you still save your bike and just can´t let her go.

 

[MudSnow]

In one of the most scientifically done comparisons of wheel size, done by world cup racers, 29ers were faster than 26ers by much less than half of 1% over a course several miles long.

This is a car video, but it shows how two completely different vehicles with different strengths become very evenly matched by a mixture of track features.

 

[manpurse]

^That's a good point. I've seen a professional racecar driver in a Porsche Boxster on the track obliterating mediocre drivers in cars that had 2-3 times the horse power and cost 2-3 times as much.

I like to buy shiny new bikes and parts from time to time, but the bike marketers will have us believe that we need to buy the latest and greatest to be better faster riders when in reality we should be focusing more on developing our talent first. I bought a 27.5 (still have a 26) not too long ago but now the new cool thing is mid travel 29ers! Me and my wallet can't keep up with these trends.

 

[Mr Pig]

In one of the most scientifically done comparisons of wheel size, done by world cup racers, 29ers were faster than 26ers by much less than half of 1% over a course several miles long.

I don't believe the wheel size change was ever about racing. It was about selling bikes.

 

[Sidewalk]

If you want the fastest, you're not going to be riding 26".

My goal when out riding isn't to be the fastest, but to have the most fun getting there. My Strava times aren't exactly blazing downhill because I am aiming for every piece of chunk I can find.

Doing that kind of riding, there is no difference between my 29" 160mm bike, and my friends 26" 180mm bike. We are both full of smiles when we regroup at the bottom of the hill.

 

[slimat99]

I don't believe the wheel size change was ever about racing. It was about selling bikes.

Most certainly not about racing considering the coming out year of 650b, which just happened to be the first year of the EWS, saw 1st and 2nd overall won on discontinued 26'ers. The second year of the EWS 26" was leading the overall before it was completely removed from competition.

We all know it's the rider not the bike, but there's no getting around the fact that the industry pulled the plug on a wheel size that was wining back to back EWS titles.

 

[pdxmark]

The industry pulled 26" wheels, but I can still get 26" wheels in many varieties: The confusion...

:headexplodes:

 

[NordieBoy]

If the course is at all bumpy, I'll choose the 12kg 29er hard tail over the 9.6kg 26er hardtail every time.

 

[roadkill401]

I will take a different tact. Why I am replacing my 26"er.

The Liquid20 is 14 years old. The frame is beginning to get some cracks long the rear triangle and I don't feel like taking it to a specialized welding shop that can do aluminum.
The Rockshock Psylo shocks have had it, or more to point, just don't handle my body anymore. Getting someone to custom build a core for them just doesn't make any sense. So the only other option is to replace the forks all together. $$$ So then you start to look at what else is on the way out. Do I want to also replace the rear cassette and chain? (7 years for both of them). The Hayes hydrolic breaks need to be overhauled. The tires and tubes are just about ridden through their useful life. So when I started to add up the cost of fixing everything that needs to get done, it came to light that the cost of just buying a new 27.5" was going to be only a few dollars more than trying to revive what you might as well say is a dead horse.

Why am I riding a 27.5"er. becuase it cost too much to ride my 26" any more.

 

[JonathanGennick]

So when I started to add up the cost of fixing everything that needs to get done, it came to light that the cost of just buying a new 27.5" was going to be only a few dollars more than trying to revive what you might as well say is a dead horse.

Why am I riding a 27.5"er. becuase it cost too much to ride my 26" any more.

I get that. My own next bike will be a 27.5. I'll buy whatever is in the mainstream for value, and right now that means 27.5.

 

[richj8990]

I will take a different tact. Why I am replacing my 26"er.

The Liquid20 is 14 years old. The frame is beginning to get some cracks long the rear triangle and I don't feel like taking it to a specialized welding shop that can do aluminum.
The Rockshock Psylo shocks have had it, or more to point, just don't handle my body anymore. Getting someone to custom build a core for them just doesn't make any sense. So the only other option is to replace the forks all together. $$$ So then you start to look at what else is on the way out. Do I want to also replace the rear cassette and chain? (7 years for both of them). The Hayes hydrolic breaks need to be overhauled. The tires and tubes are just about ridden through their useful life. So when I started to add up the cost of fixing everything that needs to get done, it came to light that the cost of just buying a new 27.5" was going to be only a few dollars more than trying to revive what you might as well say is a dead horse.

Why am I riding a 27.5"er. becuase it cost too much to ride my 26" any more.

Wait for 26+ bikes to come out (not just tires, the whole bike). They are here but there are very few options right now. Wait a year or two for them to go mainstream.

For a while I thought I'd never buy a 26" again, and I criticized them in here, for better or worse. With the standard 1.95 inch tire I was getting a ton of pedal strikes and getting hung up on embedded rocks that stuck up 1-2 inches out of the ground. It was annoying. No bad crashes or anything, but annoying enough to buy a 27.5" (again). Then for the 'problem' 26" bike I went wider on the 26 front tire to 2.4 inches and that solved a lot of problems, including pedal strikes and rock hang ups. That added roughly 3/4 of an inch to the height of the tire compared to the 1.95 inch standard one. Some would argue that I just got more skilled at clearing obstacles. While I am flattered at their compliment, no, it's the tire, it's not like I suddenly got skilled in a few days. I noticed the difference almost immediately. The bike's equipment did that, not me. The old geometry of short and upright still sucks for going down steep stuff (I feel like the whole bike is going fall forward over the front wheel), but downhill is much more doable with a wider tire. Then I read about 26+, and how 26 x 3.0 is as tall or a bit taller than a standard 27.5 x 2.1 tire.

At 5'8" and 145 lbs, I love the thought of 27.5+ but I don't need any more rollover height than 27-28 inches. If a 26 x 2.8 is about 27.4 inches tall, and 26 x 3.0 is on paper 27.7 inches tall, that's enough rollover for me. So if and when 26+ bikes start coming out with a lot of different options, like the usual suspension, drivetrain, brake, etc. stuff then I'll seriously look at them. 27.5+ sounds awesome but it's basically a 29" with wide tires. 26+ seems a lot better, more nimble size combined with better traction, and still decent rollover, it seems like the best of all worlds for a rider under 5'10". I have not tried a fat bike yet but I'm not doing snow/sand so a + tire should be perfect. I wonder if a company like Trek will sell these in 13", 15", 17" frame sizes (I'll pick 17"). In the meantime I'll put a 27.5" fork on the 26" bike and try a 2.8 front tire for a while.

 

[blaklabl]

Wait for 26+ bikes to come out (not just tires, the whole bike). They are here but there are very few options right now. Wait a year or two for them to go mainstream.

For a while I thought I'd never buy a 26" again, and I criticized them in here, for better or worse. With the standard 1.95 inch tire I was getting a ton of pedal strikes and getting hung up on embedded rocks that stuck up 1-2 inches out of the ground. It was annoying. No bad crashes or anything, but annoying enough to buy a 27.5" (again). Then for the 'problem' 26" bike I went wider on the 26 front tire to 2.4 inches and that solved a lot of problems, including pedal strikes and rock hang ups. That added roughly 3/4 of an inch to the height of the tire compared to the 1.95 inch standard one. Some would argue that I just got more skilled at clearing obstacles. While I am flattered at their compliment, no, it's the tire, it's not like I suddenly got skilled in a few days. I noticed the difference almost immediately. The bike's equipment did that, not me. The old geometry of short and upright still sucks for going down steep stuff (I feel like the whole bike is going fall forward over the front wheel), but downhill is much more doable with a wider tire. Then I read about 26+, and how 26 x 3.0 is as tall or a bit taller than a standard 27.5 x 2.1 tire.

At 5'8" and 145 lbs, I love the thought of 27.5+ but I don't need any more rollover height than 27-28 inches. If a 26 x 2.8 is about 27.4 inches tall, and 26 x 3.0 is on paper 27.7 inches tall, that's enough rollover for me. So if and when 26+ bikes start coming out with a lot of different options, like the usual suspension, drivetrain, brake, etc. stuff then I'll seriously look at them. 27.5+ sounds awesome but it's basically a 29" with wide tires. 26+ seems a lot better, more nimble size combined with better traction, and still decent rollover, it seems like the best of all worlds for a rider under 5'10". I have not tried a fat bike yet but I'm not doing snow/sand so a + tire should be perfect. I wonder if a company like Trek will sell these in 13", 15", 17" frame sizes (I'll pick 17"). In the meantime I'll put a 27.5" fork on the 26" bike and try a 2.8 front tire for a while.

This is what I am excited about, especially when more tires and wheels become available. I am 99% sure my next bike will be a custom something hardtail, but I'd like it to be 26+ or 27.5 only. I have no need or desire for 27.5+ or larger, I too am only 5'8".

 

[richj8990]

This is what I am excited about, especially when more tires and wheels become available. I am 99% sure my next bike will be a custom something hardtail, but I'd like it to be 26+ or 27.5 only. I have no need or desire for 27.5+ or larger, I too am only 5'8".

Another option I may do (if 26 x 2.8 can fit in back, it's going to be tight), that you can put 26+ tires (and of course wheels) on a 27.5 frame, so you basically get a modern geometry bike with 26" wheels. The 26+ wheelsets are typically $500+; you can have the LBS build them for roughly $150 each depending on the hub quality you want. The 26+ rims are there, a lot of them, it's just the wheelsets right now in 2018 that are elusive and on the pricey side at least for me. On the front I only need the standard 100 x 9 so a Shimano Alivio hub for $12 is fine, I'm not picky as long as it rolls.

 

[jupiter58]

Why I ride 26". I have built up a 26er with top end NOS parts that were substantially discounted. The handling is so quick. I get a perverse pleasure of leaving a hotshot unfit rider behind on his overbuilt full suspension bike that he brought to a trail that only requires a simple bike.I have all three wheel sizes, they each have their attributes. NOS frames can be purchased from China for under $200.00, such as Cube brand or Giant. I set mine up with a 2x10(Shimano),1x9, 1x10 (RaceFace single ring) with perfect chainline.

 

[MudSnow]

Most 27.5 frames and forks will easily take at least a 26 x 2.8" on the front and 26 x 2.6" or bigger on the back.

And there are several 26" rims 35mm inside or wider, such as WTB Asym, Velocity Dually, WTB Scraper, Stan's Hugo.

 

[NordieBoy]

Just scored a set of Schwalbe Pro Core inserts for my Chameleon for about $60us.
Low pressure, here I come

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

 

[k^2]

I think the post is more like: why do you still ride 26? we can´t bring a war 26x 650 or 29er because everyone here might have a 26er, look at her and say: I cant sell you, you are so fun. Even when you already ride bigger wheels just because you´ve got a superstar new bike and she was not available in 26 size. Your wife look at you and demands the 26er to be sold but you resist, because it is more than a bike. You know you still can rip on her and await for the day that you will be so fit that you will get her and go faster than everyone else, or on that day that you know you don´t need to go fast and want have fun, even if this day will not happen in an year time, you still save your bike and just can´t let her go.

I am exactly in this boat. In my garage there are four bikes hanging from the ceiling. 26,27.5,29 and 29HT. No way I am selling my Blur XCc (21.5 lb). It is my first high end bike. Too many good memories. Like to take it for a spin from time to time. Still tons of nimble fun! Despite being "outdated" this bike still rocks. Also it is the bike that easiest fits in the trunk

 

[Jack Burns]

Similar situation here as well.

Something else we going through these days is 27.2, what's the point?

We've got a brace of 27.2 seatposts.

Now we're in the habit of using dropper posts, and 27.2 is just too skinny and niche for many options. However there are a few out there.

Who ride's 26 & 27.2 with a dropper post? Who has drilled into an old 26" seat tube to create a stealth cable routing? Would anyone dare to?

I don't, but I'm telling you right now I probably will do these things one day...well maybe not.

So will my wife. She's got a nice 26'er.

Back in the day there was a whole different approach obviously, where we'd just get back and sort of stiffen up the core and suck the seat into the gut toake it down the steepest sections. It was nuts. Sometimes we'd get stuck back there! Remember that?

Last weekend I saw a guy on a pristine 94' Bontrager. It looked like a BMX bike next to all the long legged low and slack FS bikes on the summit. But it still looked slick.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[Jack Burns]

Similar situation here as well.

Something else we going through these days is 27.2, what's the point?

We've got a brace of 27.2 seatposts.

Now we're in the habit of using dropper posts, and 27.2 is just too skinny and niche for many options. However there are a few out there.

Who ride's 26 & 27.2 with a dropper post? Who has drilled into an old 26" seat tube to create a stealth cable routing? Would anyone dare to?

I don't, but I'm telling you right now I probably will do these things one day...well maybe not.

So will my wife. She's got a nice 26'er.

Back in the day there was a whole different approach obviously, where we'd just get back and sort of stiffen up the core and suck the seat into the gut toake it down the steepest sections. It was nuts. Sometimes we'd get stuck back there! Remember that?

Last weekend I saw a guy on a pristine 94' Bontrager. It looked like a BMX bike next to all the long legged low and slack FS bikes on the summit. But it still looked slick.

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

Actually this Bontrager might be older than 1994. Can anyone identify it?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[mik_git]

probably 92 or 93...