[mdb1974]

Sorry for the double post but I listed this on the 650b section but traffic has been really low and I wanted to get some 29er input.

_______________

The release of Haro's new 650b bike peaked my interest. Had my Christmas budget been a bit more plush I would have already bought one. However, being unable to pull the trigger I was forced to vicariously enjoy the new ride through all the media buzz the mainstreaming of the "Goldilox" wheel was sure to generate (insert soundtrack of chirping crickets here). Looking at four or five "Interbike" overviews in major rags I was surprised to see no mention. Obviously there is some web presence but nothing noteworthy.

Being a regular to the 29er MTBR I hopped on over to the 650b section (insert soundtrack of chirping crickets here). Not only is there no Beasley buzz but there is no buzz. The "sub" area for 29ers is posted at a rate of 10 to 1. What's up with the 650b movement, or lack there of? Are they really gaining momentum or is the slight influx of products a result of industry speculation from a few years back now coming to fruition behind the curve.

I know that Haro has sold a fair number of Beasley's in comparison to the limited run. I know that this is the off season. I also know that the 29er floundered in the early days.
But there are some worrying signs. 29ers really only had to deal with resistance from the 26er camp, the resistance to 650b, however, seems to be two fold. From other post I have made many of the 29er camp feel that 650 is nothing more than a compromise (also, a big chunk of early adopters has buried a lot of capital in the new size, diminishing the market). And, on the other side, many 26ers seem to have dug in their heels after years of mocking the "novelty" wagon wheels.

Hopefully this spring will be big for Haro. If the market does not respond and they get burned that could scare off a lot of people.

 

[Soupboy]

Make me a 32er.

 

[GeoKrpan]

The argument that most appealed to me for 650b was that a fatter tire could be run without increasing the overall diameter of the tire. Thus, you could have a plusher, fatter tire without affecting the gearing. It would be an improvement over a skinny tire on a 700c rim.
But, I think that the problem is overstated. I'm having no problem using the same drivetrain on a 29er that I used on a 26er.
A larger wheel is going to roll over the bumps better. A 650b is going to better than a 26er and a 29er is going to be better yet.
That really reduces the rationale for 650b wheels FOR MOUNTAIN BIKING.

 

[Guitar Ted]

The argument that most appealed to me for 650b was that a fatter tire could be run without increasing the overall diameter of the tire. Thus, you could have a plusher, fatter tire without affecting the gearing. It would be an improvement over a skinny tire on a 700c rim.
But, I think that the problem is overstated. I'm having no problem using the same drivetrain on a 29er that I used on a 26er.
A larger wheel is going to roll over the bumps better. A 650b is going to better than a 26er and a 29er is going to be better yet.
That really reduces the rationale for 650b wheels FOR MOUNTAIN BIKING.

Here's a big reason for the apathy in 650B, as far as I'm concerned. Put succintly, there isn't enough of a difference from 26"ers to make the move in that direction appealing. The fact that a 2.7 - 3.0" 26"er tire/wheel combo is the same outer diameter as a NeoMoto/650B rimmed wheel is rather telling.

Then the hardware and tires selection isn't really coming online as was promised two years ago. Of all the manufacturers listed on the original "manifesto" circulated around in the beginning, only Haro has really pulled through, so far. Sure, smaller scale manufacturers like Ventana have been accomodating, but that was expected from the beginning. Smaller manufacturers and custom builders are adept at that sort of thing, or should be.

It has been said that Kenda was going to produce Nevegals and maybe something else, but nada so far. Panaracer was said to be coming out with a FireCross, but so far.......nuttin! There is a WTB prototype WeirWolf out now, but there hasn't been a release date set for it as of yet.

Then the lack of an accepted name in front suspension has really hurt. It is rumored that Manitou will be on board by 2010, but it might be too late by then.

Which brings me to my final point: the point made in the quote above about problems with 29"ers being "overstated". I would say, rather, that the problems and objections have been overcome by manufacturers. Choices in tires and suspension, weight in tires and wheels, gearing is next with a rumored 36T cassette, 20/30/42 T cranksets are possible now, and more selection is happening in gearing all the time. Handling has been addressed, long travel suspension is here, and more full suspension all mountain stuff is here or coming. Stuff that they said just a few years ago was impossible, too much of a compromise, or "too difficult to do" in 700c format.

Davidcopperfield notwithstanding, 29"ers have made a ton of advancements in the last three years, advancements that are making the argument for an "inbetween wheel size" less attractive.

I don't have anything against the 650B format, I really don't. I just question the "why" of it more than anything. It is getting harder everyday to justify doing a 650B bike when 29"ers and 26"ers have all of that ground covered.

That's my view, your mileage may vary.

 

[Rainman]

I've tried and am still trying them all on my Mojo... 26/26, 650B/26, 650B/29.

I own 2 29'ers and the Mojo, which I run mostly as a 650B setup.
What attracted me to the 650B wheel size was that it almost has the same accelleration as a 26' and almost the same roll-over objects as a 29". In other words, it retains most of the benefits of both wheel sizes, without most of the penalties of them.
It's easy to adapt 26" frames to 650B and reap the benefits of that great roll-over and handling, without having to do too much to the frame geometry.
Having spent several years on 29'ers and LOTS of years on 26" bikes, I can honestly say that the 650B wheel size has a lot going for it. I have been very impressed with this wheel size.
I think that it is very suitable for slightly shorter riders, whereas 29'ers suit tall riders better... and before anyone starts into me about "short riders can ride 29'ers" ... i'm 5'4" and ride 29'ers, so I know all about that side of the arguement. What i'm saying here, or trying to ... is that 650B definitely has a place in the scheme of things, just like 26" and 29'ers do. All three wheel sizes have good and not so good points, but from what I have experienced with 650B so far, it has more of the good points about it than both the other sizes...
650B requires less frame geometry 'tweaking' than 29'ers, especially for the small size frames, and has better roll over than 26" frames, yet still retains the accelleration of the smaller wheel.
In the end, it's up to the rider. As a cheap experiment, if you have an old 26" bike somewhere gathering dust, drop a 650B front wheel onto it and give it a run. I can guarantee that you will love it.
In my opinion, 650B deserves a place in between the two established sizes of 26" and 29'ers. It has too many advantages to not be considered a viable proposition for a lot of riders.


Rainman.

 

[Cloxxki]

Knowing that you're testing things, should you not look out to speak in wording of "attracted", and then mix it like you actually felt that way testing it?

So simple as people like to make bikes, they're trying to over-complicate wheelsizes.
Bigger rolls better, period.
Momentum, no such thing. Unless you mean those turning thingies handing from your hubs. Like 10% of THAT weight is going to totally break your ride.
People just zoom in and in and in, till there's only the difference, and the big picture is lost.

GT has written about it better than I can, but an in-between wheel size is just not going to bring any magical trade-offs.
There's one 650B tire now, right, and it only comes in 650B? Fun comparing it to 26" and 29" that way. We can review the difference to be something else than the laws of physics dictate. It will roll like a better wheel, but because it's not quite as big, it will accellerate just like the smaller one. Yeah right.

Let's all joins hands, sing oooohhhhmm and decide that 2009 will be the year where we once and for all quite whining about rotating weight and its effects on acceleration.
Don't let me show up to your local race with wheels I added weight to, to quatruple or more the rotational weight, to show how bad it really makes a rider ride! You're not going to tell the difference if it not you on the bike, even if you know how (s)he normally rides.
10 percent people. And 650B is 4% points of that.
650B is the very most complicated 26" wheel ever made. It claiming to be big AND small at the same time, but it's BIG when rolling and SMALL when accelerating, the magical wheel size!

650B makes all kinds of sense if you have destroyed your 26" wheels in you Surly 1x1 bike. It's bigger, thus better. The half inch BB rise may work out for you, it may also bug you. The diff is so small, the wheels will exchange between bikes. Like I said, complicated 26" wheels.

Soupboy, what is 32" worth it to you? We need a few rich riders to stick together, and I can make it happen. Properly from the get-go. A wheelsize the public actually asked for.
It will not be marketed, it will not be explained. You'll need to know the magic handshake to be allowed to order one. When asked about it, you will be contracted to declare that 32" is in fact rubbish, way too sluggish, and it won't hold a corner. Worst bike you ever got.

650B would be sort-of be interesting as a frame size XS option.
XS-650B
S-29"
M-30"
L-31"
XL-32"

32" will need to happen, but we can forget the ones now pushing 650B to be of help (even though technically they have all the good contacts and know-how).

Rim bead size 698mm, let it be known! A full 3 inches larger than 29", which was only +2.5" over 26". And, people want it.

 

[MABman]

It has too many advantages to not be considered a viable proposition for a lot of riders.


Rainman.

Especially the 5' 4" +/- ones? Everybody has to have a soap box to stand on. Some are happier with smaller ones and others need bigger ones to make themselves happy.

On this, the dawn of the 10th anniversary of the "tire", I would have hoped by now that people had figured out that there are always going to be many ways to skin a bike. As an early adopter of the 29" wheel it makes me glad to see that it is finally getting to the point where mainstream acceptance is the norm. $400 Dick's bikes make it all worthwhile more than $450 handlebars. But one would not exist without the other. I will never regret making the switch personally but time and technology does tend to create other ideas that incorporate past experience with those just unfolding.

 

[Rainman]

Sorry Jan, i'm having a hard time understanding where you are going with this.. but i'm trying to understand you.

All I can say for sure is that unless you have actually tried a 650b back to back with 26" and 29'er, then you really can't say too much in this discussion...and that's not aimed at you specifically Jan, even though you and I are on the opposite ends of the size scale.
Any 26" bike can benefit from the addition of a 650B front wheel. I've tried it, tested it, and I know it works.
My point is that there is room for the three wheel sizes, and having tested and tried all three separately ... and together, [mix and match etc..] i'm convinced that the 650B is a good thing ...... and so are 26" and 29'ers too. Why limit our choices? No need to, not when there are benefits to be gained for riders everywhere.


R.

 

[Guitar Ted]

I've tried and am still trying them all on my Mojo... 26/26, 650B/26, 650B/29.

I own 2 29'ers and the Mojo, which I run mostly as a 650B setup.

Okay, I respect that you are giving it a solid try. I recognize that.

What attracted me to the 650B wheel size was that it almost has the same accelleration as a 26' and almost the same roll-over objects as a 29". In other words, it retains most of the benefits of both wheel sizes, without most of the penalties of them.

Well, here it is, really. The reason that the OP posted was that he was wondering about the momentum, or actually the lack there of, in regards to the 650B format. It's the "almosts" that are the problem. Again, the inbetween of 650B isn't far enough removed from 26"ers, evidenced by the closeness of the overall diameter between a NeoMoto and big 26 inch rubber, and not close to what a 29"er has going on. (And yes, I have ridden 650B back to back with 29"er wheels.) This and the equipment choices are what are holding the format back in my opinion.

It's easy to adapt 26" frames to 650B and reap the benefits of that great roll-over and handling, without having to do too much to the frame geometry.

This statement echoes my comment above- that your equipment choices are still lacking, and that the difference between 26"er and 650B is somewhat minimal. As far as the frame geometry issue is concerned, it is a problem with converting a 26"er to 650B, and no longer an issue with 29"ers. (Once a calling card for going to 650B was that 29"ers had goofy geometry)

Having spent several years on 29'ers and LOTS of years on 26" bikes, I can honestly say that the 650B wheel size has a lot going for it. I have been very impressed with this wheel size.
I think that it is very suitable for slightly shorter riders, whereas 29'ers suit tall riders better... and before anyone starts into me about "short riders can ride 29'ers" ... i'm 5'4" and ride 29'ers, so I know all about that side of the arguement. What i'm saying here, or trying to ... is that 650B definitely has a place in the scheme of things, just like 26" and 29'ers do. All three wheel sizes have good and not so good points, but from what I have experienced with 650B so far, it has more of the good points about it than both the other sizes...

And your final comment here is a minority opinion. It would seem that "if" 650B did enjoy the equipment choices and distribution that 29"ers do, and on a greater scale 26"ers, that public opinion, or more correctly, votes of dollars, would actually sort this out. Until then, I admire your passion for 650B, but it doesn't explain why the format is lacking more individuals with the same passion as yourself, which is what the thread is about, I believe.

650B requires less frame geometry 'tweaking' than 29'ers, especially for the small size frames, and has better roll over than 26" frames, yet still retains the accelleration of the smaller wheel.

Well, once again, 29"er freaks are not hampered by poor acceleration. I think you will have to agree that if that was a sticking point, the pros wouldn't be toying with the idea at all. And as far as geometry goes, 29"ers really shouldn't "tweak" anything, assuming you mean 26"er geometry is the "base". 29"er companies have figured out that 29"ers require there own specific geometry, and parts designs. I think you must realize this, Rainman. I know you are up on this sort of stuff. This is a meaningless argument for 650B these days, because it doesn't solve any problems. I don't have any problems with the format existing, but it is points like these, that are trying to make a case for 650B, that don't make any sense. As far as any of it goes, I can only find validity in the statement that small sized riders can benefit from 650B.

In the end, it's up to the rider. As a cheap experiment, if you have an old 26" bike somewhere gathering dust, drop a 650B front wheel onto it and give it a run. I can guarantee that you will love it.
In my opinion, 650B deserves a place in between the two established sizes of 26" and 29'ers. It has too many advantages to not be considered a viable proposition for a lot of riders.


Rainman.

Agreed. Each has to make up their own mind. As I stated above, the "court of public opinion" will ultimately decide the fate of 650B. Right now, the "court" seems mighty apathetic.

 

[komekomegaijin]

Why not ditch 26" and 29" wheels altogether and just run with 650B?

 

[WayDownSouth]

I have to agree with GT on this one. I own several 29er's, a couple of 26er's and I was fortunate enough to borrow a 650b equipped bike from a friend for an extended test. As far as I'm concerned it's pretty simple, the benefits (or detriments) of the larger wheels are directly in proportion to their increased size. The improved "roll over ability" of the 29er is significant, the "roll over ability" of the 650b is greater than that of the 26 inch wheel but not nearly as great as a 29er. For me the benefits of the 650b were not nearly as marked as a 29er, and the benefits over the 26er whilst tangible were not significant enough to make me want to convert my 26er bikes. Hypothetically if there was a full range of 650b DH/FR tires and rims available I'd go down that road on my big travel bikes but to be quite honest I'm happy enough with 26 inch wheels for this application. In summary I do like 650b wheels, I have no doubt that for certain applications (longer travel FS frames, smaller riders) the 650b wheel is perfect but I do question wether the niche between the incumbent wheel size (the 26er) and the new contender (the 29er) is sufficiently big to push 650b development forward.

 

[Cloxxki]

Good point from WDS and GT, little less to add.

Since wheel size seems to be less than fixed to rider size (small riders also love 29"), the advantages of 650B are either smaller or imaginary compared to 29", or still a disadvantage over 26".

650B IMO is a better wheel size for every adult rider, compared to 26", as long as the selecting of rims and tires gets to at least the level of 29". Just 4% in rim size just does not add up as quickly. Your SO would barely notice if your come home from work 4% taller, broader, etc until you stood right in front of her. It is that little.
One must eyeball 26" and 650B sitting next to each other, and from the right angle, to fully appreciate that 4%. "Oh yes, I can see it now, that a whole inch right there".

General (mayority consensus on this forum summarized:
26" - good kids wheel size
650B - less bad than that, one cool tire in the size
29" - ah yes, the all-adults size
.....where the heck is 32" for even more of where that came from? Riders 5' and up can be fitted to nimble handling 29"er without toe overlap. What do you mean, "big wheels"?
Proper grown men can even handle a 36"er, albeit a bit cumbersome in the very tightest corners perhaps. Now compare those 10 extra inches to the one that 650B has to offer over 26", and we'll once again see how much we a re messing in the margin. An illness not uncommon to cycling.

 

[starre]

after 2 solid years on a 4" FS 29er i can say it is an amazing XC+ machine. where does it fall down for me? when the going gets really chunky, all mountainish and tight single track. a short ride on a friends SC nomad in tough stuff showed me it wasn't my technique and that tough stuff doesn't mean you have to struggle so much. still the wheels on the nomad seem too small for my 6'4" body. because really only Lenz is making all mountain 5" to 6" FS bikes in the 29er camp, i 'm assuming it is not technically easy to make a 29er into a real all mountain platform or that i am convinced that it is suitable for tough all mountain riding (not withstanding MCs incredible technique pushing the 29er envelope). this is where i think the 650b platform can make huge strides, in the 5.5" to 6.5" FS all mountain category. cheers and happy new year!

 

[ShoMyOFace]

Does anyone have a Betamax video cassette player................:idea:

 

[LyNx]

Some good points here and t some extent I agree with GT on the similarity between 650B abd 26", but stating that you could run a 2.7-3.0" tyre on a 26" bike to achieve the same diameter tyre is just silly. That 2.7"-3.0" tyre would probably weigh in well over 1100 grams, whereas the Neo Moto only weighs, what 700g? Who wants a pound more rubber when they don't need it? :???: Converting a 26" wheeled bike to 650B adds a lot of benefits without giving up maybe an old, trusted frame and making it "new" again, without it becoming a pig weight wise and having to spend a ton of cash.

Personally I've just decided that when funds allow I will be building up a 650B front wheel for my old Trance frameset and start riding it again. I 69erd it when my RIP9 broke and I realy did enjoy it, but had to lower the REBA to 80mm to keep the front end low enough. With a 650B front wheel I can use my old DUKE fork and have only a marginal front end height increase while gaining much better roll over.

I know for sure that the Trance is stiffer frame wise than my '08 RIP9, so I think it'll give me another "toy" to play with in this crappy economic market until I can afford and decide which bike to purchase next.

 

[mdb1974]

beta synic

Does anyone have a Betamax video cassette player................:idea:

Interesting you should mention beta. Beta is a standing joke for failed technology, but performance wise it was superior to VHS (was the standard for years in professional production). Who cares? No one, but it illustrates a point. In general success of a technology depends more on marketing and support than it's own merit. Upper end mtb buyers are more savy so it will be interesting to see if 650 lives/dies based on it's merits or simply the fickleness of the market.

 

[Guitar Ted]

Some good points here and t some extent I agree with GT on the similarity between 650B abd 26", but stating that you could run a 2.7-3.0" tyre on a 26" bike to achieve the same diameter tyre is just silly. That 2.7"-3.0" tyre would probably weigh in well over 1100 grams, whereas the Neo Moto only weighs, what 700g? ............

The point was that the sizes are close together, to the point that you could achieve the same/similar diameter with a 26 inch tire/wheel combination. I didn't say it was a great idea. I didn't say it would be light weight. Just to be clear.

Then again, all the talk of using 650B on long travel All Mountain rigs is going to be falling on deaf ears when your only legitimate tire choice is the NeoMoto and the Haro Werx Sonix 650B rig isn't scheduled to make an appearance until 2010.

This to illustrate my point that the equipment choices are lacking and that by the time the Haro bows, there will be the Niner W.F.O.9, another long travel 29"er fork, and possibly a bigger, beefier 29"er tire than we already have, making choices for burly rubber to bash on chunk even wider than we have now. Will it be too late for 650B to make an impact? Who knows.

The comments about weight in the tires is also telling. A 26"er 2.7"er is about 1000 plus grams eh? Whaddaya figure a true AM/FR 650B tire is going to tip the scales at? People launch into 29"ers for having too much weight at the wheels, well 650B isn't immune to that either. Once again, in a comparison of equal measure, (which obviously doesn't exist yet, and may never), the 650B will be found to be nominally different. Not a big enough of a difference to bother with for most 26"er folks.

Not to mention the fact that 650B has always been categorized as one of the 26 inch wheel sizes.

So, to bring this back around to the original point, why isn't there a buzz about 650B?

Too many "missing pieces" and not enough of a difference to make 650B an exciting proposition, apparently. Judging from what I can see anyway.

 

[Guitar Ted]

..... i 'm assuming it is not technically easy to make a 29er into a real all mountain platform or that i am convinced that it is suitable for tough all mountain riding (not withstanding MCs incredible technique pushing the 29er envelope). this is where i think the 650b platform can make huge strides, in the 5.5" to 6.5" FS all mountain category. cheers and happy new year!

This is another point that the 650B advocates like to make in an attempt to give reason for the format. That in terms of geometry, too many compromises must be made to get a long travel 29"er, so go 650B!

Well, once again, we need only look to history for some clues as to why this is a silly notion. In the early to mid 90's, a symposium of the days brightest mtb designers and honches was convened which the results of were printed in a popular rag of the day. Many here will recall this. If I remember correctly, it was stated that the longest travel a 26"er bike would ever achieve would be 4 inches. Four inches! It was said that too many compromises in geometry would have to be made to get more travel. Materials and engineering wasn't capable of overcoming all the dynamics at play to manufacture a reliable, tough, and reasonably lightweight 26 inch wheeled mountain bike with more than 4 inches of travel.

Sound familiar?

The "they say it can't be done" argument for 29"ers is lame. Again, Lenz and the Niner guys are showing us that indeed, it can be done with 29"er wheels. So to say that 650B is the answer to getting "big wheeled benefits in long travel" is not really an answer anymore.

Besides, I happen to know that there is an 8 inch travel 29"er on the drawing board that is only waiting for tires and forks to catch up before it becomes a reality.

Once again, smaller riders may benefit from a 650B long travel bike, but a 26"er can do most if not all of that in a lighter weight package, (important for small riders).

The momentum for 650B will be harder to generate the more time goes by, I feel.

 

[Flyer]

I was initially very interested in the 650B and that Ventana El Bastardo was looking really interesting. I decided to give it time to "mature" and bought a Moots 29er and then a RIP9 and a Racerx 29er. Before this, I have had, what I believe to be, some of the best 26ers in the biz from Yeti, Turner, Ventana, and Ibis.

I have now become very used to the 29ers and am significantly faster on them in practically any terrain....mostly due to the flywheel effect and me feeling much more stable on a 29er. I have suddenly lost all my interest in the 650B wheel. I'm 5'11" and ride here in Colorado.

If I wanted to get another bike, I'd still consider a FS 650B but will wait for other options besides the Ventana, primarily to get a different suspension design though the Bastardo is always an option.

 

[starre]

and how much would it weigh?

please don't misunderstand, i am a 29er enthusiast but at least overseas i still see little or no interest in 29ers. i guess 26ers really do work maybe i'm wrong, but i see a much higher probability of the 29er going extinct when popular standard 26" frames can be used for BOTH 650b and 26 wheels.

one of the things that has me thinking of the applicability of 650b to 5+" FS bikes is the problem of increased weight of 29er. while it is true you can build up a 4 inch FS 29er bike to 27-28 lbs, using slightly beefier rims (flows) and more rugged tires (rampages) on a solid frame like my FS 29er (sultan) with a decent XT build puts you in the 32 pound range. this is the same weight range of the good 6+" 26" bikes (RFX/nomad). i've been riding quite a lot and feel that 30 to 32 lbs is about the limit for dragging around a bike for full day trail riding. IMHO it will take quite a bit of $$$ to put a 5+" 29er bikes in the below 32 pound category let alone an 8" version, while i think the weight penalty for 650b in this category would be critically less.

Besides, I happen to know that there is an 8 inch travel 29"er on the drawing board that is only waiting for tires and forks to catch up before it becomes a reality.