[Skooks]

Really? Which pro DH rider has got on the podium on a 26-er in the last 3 years? Most pro riders switched to 27.5 around 2015, and some race 29ers now. Check out this link:

https://www.singletracks.com/blog/m...tb-gear/the-10-fastest-downhill-bikes-in-the-world-according-to-race-results/7/

You wont find 26ers on this list.

And yes, of course pro DH racers are faster than me. That has nothing to do with wheel size.

As expected, no response from Neuner.

 

[Jack Burns]

What I really don't get is the 27.5" size.

It's like the manufacturers killed 26" and created 27.5" just to be able to sell/start over on a market flooded with good cheap 26" parts.

I've moved on to 29" since a few months just because my old bike (Rocky Mountain Element) is a late 90's/early-mid 00' build and it was time for something new.

26, 27.5, 29. And what about boost 148?

I've never thought these kinds of changes come about primarily to force people to buy more equipment. But I agree that it does drive more sales.

As one who rides them all, (except 29+ so far), 26 is still a good format. Going from 29 one day, and 26 the next, or vice versa, even on the same trails, is fine.

Okay, maybe if it's all about average speed, then 27.5 is faster, and 29 is fastest.

Here's something I think is a benefit : 27+/29 bikes. Some bikes can be run as 27+ bikes and 29ers with just a wheel change. Each tire size changes the handling.

Yeah, more tires to sell and buy and wear out.

My wife rides X-small frames. She has a 29" X-small hardtail that rolls and fits.

Yeah, they sell more tires.

Dddddddddddddd3dx,*[emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji846][emoji846][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji846][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518][emoji2518] a lot of 26" tires that need to be used m4éï

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

 

[C-H]

27.5 may not be the wheel size for you, but for a lot of people it works very well. I am short and I ride steep, technical trails with a lot of tight corners. The 27.5 wheel is perfect for me. I am not saying that 29ers are no good, and I will likely own one someday, but right now I am really enjoying the smaller wheels

I was just wondering why 27.5 was created when 26 exists? I never ridden 27.5 but I can barely see the difference between 26 and 27.5.

 

[JonathanGennick]

I was just wondering why 27.5 was created when 26 exists? I never ridden 27.5 but I can barely see the difference between 26 and 27.5.

There's a long history that goes back at least to Tom Ritchey in the 1970s: The renaissance of the 650B wheel .

Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if the plus-sizing thing had happened first. Ritchey and others in the early days were working with 1.75" tires, which are way small in diameter on 26er rims. Get up to 2.6" and wider though, and diameter begins to become reasonable.

 

[kapusta]

I was just wondering why 27.5 was created when 26 exists?

27.5 - AKA 650b - has existed for a very long time.

 

[C-H]

27.5 - AKA 650b - has existed for a very long time.

Well yes, I know.... but you DO get what I mean right?
From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.

29-er is a different story. It is way different from 26.

 

[C-H]

There's a long history that goes back at least to Tom Ritchey in the 1970s: The renaissance of the 650B wheel .

Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if the plus-sizing thing had happened first. Ritchey and others in the early days were working with 1.75" tires, which are way small in diameter on 26er rims. Get up to 2.6" and wider though, and diameter begins to become reasonable.

Thx. That's a great read.

 

[kapusta]

Well yes, I know.... but you DO get what I mean right?
From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.

29-er is a different story. It is way different from 26.

The difference is not as extreme as going to 29er, but it is different. Small changes make a difference. Not a huge improvement, but an improvement, IMO.

I don't really buy the industry conspiracy arguments I often see. Most companies rejected the idea, until it became apparent that very soon they would not be selling many bikes if they did not get on the 650b train. That was them simply responding to the market. Ask Dave Turner (Turner Bikes). for years, the 26" 5-Spot was his best selling bike. But the moment he released the Burner (nearly identical to the 5-Spot, but with 27.5 wheels) it was all he could do to GIVE 5-Spots away. Worked for me, as that is the only reason I could ever afford a 5-Spot. Which I still ride as my main MTB.

There was never anything magic about 26" or 29". They were just common wheel sizes at the time they were pressed into service for mtb use. One could argue that 650b is the first time a wheel size was chosen strictly on its merits, rather than because it was already common as dirt (as with 26 and 29).

 

[JonathanGennick]

I don't really buy the industry conspiracy arguments I often see. Most companies rejected the idea, until it became apparent that very soon they would not be selling many bikes if they did not get on the 650b train. That was them simply responding to the market.

I agree. My memory matches yours. No bicycle brand wants to be stuck with container loads of inventory that won't sell. The big shift came about because "nobody ever got fired for spec'ing 650b".

 

[wightweenie26er]

My view on this subject is 'Choice' If i want to buy a 29 then fine, a 650 fine or the 26er. then i can. Talk of killing off one or the other is mad. I remember they said that about analogue watches when the digital came out. Now who is still king? If you pay big money you buy a round face with hands. The cheap give away watches are the digitals. Lucky some companies still make high end 26er kit. Long live Extralite. As i'm happy to ride a 26er. And maybe people will come back after seeing this whole 29er thing as a marketing ploy to sell bikes.

 

[fokof]

From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.

Yep ^^^
exactly
They want to make you believe that you HAVE to buy this new bike/wheels/tyres.
That how they make their money.

Here's a photo of my main MTB and My commuter
The 650 has 1,75 slick the 26 has 2,2 knobby , not a world of difference.
Same diameter.

Now when someone tells me that 650 rolls a lot better over obstacles than 26, I kinda find that funny

I'm not talking 700 wheels but 650.

 

[shekky]

My view on this subject is 'Choice' If i want to buy a 29 then fine, a 650 fine or the 26er. then i can. Talk of killing off one or the other is mad. I remember they said that about analogue watches when the digital came out. Now who is still king? If you pay big money you buy a round face with hands. The cheap give away watches are the digitals. Lucky some companies still make high end 26er kit. Long live Extralite. As i'm happy to ride a 26er. And maybe people will come back after seeing this whole 29er thing as a marketing ploy to sell bikes.

i beg to differ on the watch thing:

https://www.timepiece.com/casio-g-s...31&pkw=&pmt=&plc=&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIibHplb_V3gIVD6rsCh3X_gmqEAkYAyABEgKWpPD_BwE

 

[JonathanGennick]

Here's a photo of my main MTB and My commuter
The 650 has 1,75 slick the 26 has 2,2 knobby , not a world of difference.

That's why I wonder whether 650b would have taken over so fast had the plus-size trend occurred first. We can't redo history to find out though.

 

[J.B. Weld]

I remember they said that about analogue watches when the digital came out. Now who is still king?

People still wear watches?

 

[Emax]

Interesting comments... ultimately the big wheel revolution was an industry conspiracy to disrupt the way things were, and make money on it. The bicycle industry is much more consolidated now than they have ever been, and all these "big fish" can lean on others to make things happen. The rest of the smaller players have to go with the flow. To me the unsettling part of what is going on is that there is no one out there who would be willing to build 26ers with "modern" geometry, that would allow folks to swap their old bike components onto the new frame and have a "modern" bike (this is an oversimplification). I'm concerned about the industry's willingness to abandon older technology that not only works - but works well, only to support the new thing. The way they are leaning on racers in the road cycling to use disc brakes is a good example of what I'm talking about here. Discs on a road bike won't make you go faster, but they sure will make servicing your bike a lot harder, and more expensive...

I admit that I'm not an early adopter, and I loved the 8 speed because it worked great, but then switched to 9 speed and that was fine, though the chain would break more often, then came 11 speed and 2x and 1x and the importance of ratios faded as the range became king... I'm still on my 27 gears and completely happy. I don't even know why people switch to 1x or 2x, front derailleur gets set up once, and that's it - at least on my bikes... my problems will begin as all the parts I'm using start wearing out to the point of having to be replaced - but I've got 7 bikes at least and bunch of spares - so I think I'm set.

 

[J.B. Weld]

The way they are leaning on racers in the road cycling to use disc brakes is a good example of what I'm talking about here. Discs on a road bike won't make you go faster, but they sure will make servicing your bike a lot harder, and more expensive...

Tests have shown that disc brakes can improve downhill times, especially in foul weather. Aside from that they're just better, and ime require very little service.

There are still lots of frame builders who will make exactly what you want for a reasonable price.

 

[Sparticus]

Well yes, I know.... but you DO get what I mean right?
From 26 to 27.5 is a minuscule change. The cynic in me just see it as a way for the manufacturers to start over on basically the same platform. The 26 market got filled and it was time to make some new money.

29-er is a different story. It is way different from 26.

There's objective history and then we each have our own perspective. What follows is my perspective.

The 26" wheel dominated for about three decades. Fisher got behind the 29" wheel and early this century it was like popping a zit -- once it blew, it went all over. Riders, especially taller riders, appreciated a wheel size that offers genuine rollover improvement. And it does.

But it's not as easy to build a small frame around a bigger wheel. Especially full suspension frames.

I believe (aka my perspective) the bicycle industry was eager to embrace the 27.5" wheel in part because it solved production problems. The 27.5" wheel allowed bike mfgrs to make long travel frames in small & XS sizes. That and yeah, every time "standards" change, demanding consumers gotta buy new shite. Yet another "new" wheel size? Terrific -- more sales.

But this was the order -- 26 then 29 then 27.5. It wasn't progressive 26-27.5-29. After small, then big, the industry claimed the mid-size wheel was kinda like Goldilocks. Except it's not like Goldilocks because taller folks are genuinely served better by the largest wheel of the three. For everybody else, there's the 27.5" wheel. 26" is for kids and kid-sized adults.

Now don't shake your finger at me, I'm not out to intentionally offend anyone. This is simply my opinion. I told you from the beginning you'd get my perspective and that's what you got.
=sParty

 

[JonathanGennick]

Interesting comments... ultimately the big wheel revolution was an industry conspiracy to disrupt the way things were, and make money on it.

That's not really a fair characterization. Gary Fisher pushed 29ers because like any other brand he was looking for product differentiation and to sell bicycles. I'm sure it helped that he's a tall guy and personally believed in the larger wheel size. Much of the bike tech I enjoy today derives from that sort of vision and drive.

To me the unsettling part of what is going on is that there is no one out there who would be willing to build 26ers with "modern" geometry

Do you want to be stuck with a few container loads of bicycles or frames that won't sell? Do you want to put thousands of dollars of _your_ money on the line to pay for a production run of frames? I like 26er options too, and just built two 26er wheelsets, but I'm not sure that I'd bet my retirement fund on a container load of frames.

 

[Sparticus]

Discs on a road bike won't make you go faster

A wise man once said, "If I can STOP faster, then I can GO faster!"
=sParty

 

[blaklabl]

26" is for kids and kid-sized adults.

I know its your perspective/opinion, but that's not really fair. I'm not kid-sized at 5'8", and 26" wheels are still my preference. Not because I am a luddite, or have my head in the sand, or am throwing some tantrum no one will ever see. I've sold every 29"er I've ever had, and in fact just sold the 27.5" bike I had not because of the wheel size but because it offered me nothing I didn't already have.

Sure, eventually 26" parts will dwindle even further, and to get what I really like in a frame I will most likely have to get a 27.5" compatible custom built frame - but until them I am content with the wheel size I prefer.

But to say 26 is only good for kids and kid-sized adults, that's a little shitty.