Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 111 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,023 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I've recently been thinking about mulleting my sb165 for more compliance and rollover but when I had a 2.8 plus on the front I was plenty happy with it...just the squirm on my narrow rims was a bit more than I wanted. I really don't know why 27.5 plus on wide rims is not preffered over 29 on narrow rims...you get similar rollover with more traction and massively more comfort. It really bothers me they may get rid of plus tyres and eventually 27.5. I'm thinking of replacing my 27.5 wheels to wider rims but worried it will be a pointless investment if they stop producing plus tyres soon. I feel pushed by the industry to go 29 for longevity sake even though in reality I think I would prefer 27.5 plus.
 

· always licking the glass
Joined
·
4,568 Posts
So I've recently been thinking about mulleting my sb165 for more compliance and rollover but when I had a 2.8 plus on the front I was plenty happy with it...just the squirm on my narrow rims was a bit more than I wanted. I really don't know why 27.5 plus on wide rims is not preffered over 29 on narrow rims...you get similar rollover with more traction and massively more comfort. It really bothers me they may get rid of plus tyres and eventually 27.5. I'm thinking of replacing my 27.5 wheels to wider rims but worried it will be a pointless investment if they stop producing plus tyres soon. I feel pushed by the industry to go 29 for longevity sake even though in reality I think I would prefer 27.5 plus.
They still make regular 26” tires. They’re going to keep making 27.5 from 2.3 to 2.8 for a long time.

There’s plenty of 40mm rims out there. The RF Arc 40s i got are awesome.

Get what you want. Don’t buy crap you don’t. We don’t need new bikes every year, despite what the industry sells. Maintain your equipment, you’ll be fine.
 

· Rippin da fAt
Joined
·
12,948 Posts
So I've recently been thinking about mulleting my sb165 for more compliance and rollover but when I had a 2.8 plus on the front I was plenty happy with it...just the squirm on my narrow rims was a bit more than I wanted. I really don't know why 27.5 plus on wide rims is not preffered over 29 on narrow rims...you get similar rollover with more traction and massively more comfort. It really bothers me they may get rid of plus tyres and eventually 27.5. I'm thinking of replacing my 27.5 wheels to wider rims but worried it will be a pointless investment if they stop producing plus tyres soon. I feel pushed by the industry to go 29 for longevity sake even though in reality I think I would prefer 27.5 plus.
Seriously?
A fellow needs to use common sense when choosing rims and tires from the start! The 90's were an experiment in utter failures when the industry tried to shove road rims up every orifice in the human body... I located many real rims for that era to avoid 2.125's on i15 rims for good reason! I hated having to inflate tires to the point that they had the hardness of tungsten. Was great if all I did was a straight line.

Onward to plus, yeah, the industry has a boner to get us back on 2.1's. 27.5 has a following, 29 has a following. 27.5 is not going away but stop making mass quantities of anything and it becomes a mess. 3.0 is very limited in any diameter. Teravail Coronado is one that is still in mint, beyond that, Surly Knard and Dirt Wizard are still listed as 3.0 in 27.5 and 29.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
433 Posts
I enjoy my 27.5 with 2.8s but to be fair I have nothing to compare it with. That’s what my bike had when I reentered the sport and it is light years ahead of my 15 year old previous bikes performance. What I am curious about trying are some 29 wheels with a narrower tire since my bike also can handle those.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

· Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
I'd be curious to know from frame designers how much is the sacrifice to have a frame that can take 27.5 plus AND 29er wheels. That was the norm for a split second a few years ago. I read most accounts of people trying both and tending to move towards the 29er wheels more often or exclusively the longer they owned the bike, and not using the 27.5 plus for some reason. It's always nice to have options, but not at the expense a well balanced frame.
 

· Rippin da fAt
Joined
·
12,948 Posts
I'd be curious to know from frame designers how much is the sacrifice to have a frame that can take 27.5 plus AND 29er wheels. That was the norm for a split second a few years ago. I read most accounts of people trying both and tending to move towards the 29er wheels more often or exclusively the longer they owned the bike, and not using the 27.5 plus for some reason. It's always nice to have options, but not at the expense a well balanced frame.
What sacrifice? Either a frame is well thought out or is designed with inherent limitations, which would be also in the realm of inherent flaws.
I look very carefully at features of each frame I sign a check for and determine if there are reasons to pass.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
I believe the one thing that is commonly forgotten in the conversation and in the industry (even outside of MTB) is there are many solutions for many people and their needs based on personal reasons and the terrain they ride. Unfort the industry will push a certain way for monetary reasons and everyone follow which causes premature death on products. I find it nearly comical to see the big push on “progressive geometry” and the ability to go up and down mountains at blinding speeds all at the expense of practicality. Not everyone rides that way and not everyone is a 20 something rider. This spot is no different than many. What the pros are riding is what sells to the populace,,,, for big money. From my vantage point there are many people out there casually riding around in the woods for whatever their reason and many of the choices available are either way more bike than needed or the wrong choice. I could care less if my tires “squirm during cornering” or are “ too heavy and draggy”. They simply work for me and my hardtail as does my Fattie. A 6000 dollar FS 29’r carbon bike will not bring any more to the plate for me than what I am riding now other than bling factor. Its all about choices and hopefully those choices remain.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
463 Posts
Even 29 specific models spec 27.5 wheels a lot of the time for the small / extra small sizes. 27.5 will never go away for that reason alone.

I think that's why Giant went all in on 27.5 for a while - way less inventory to stock and works for all frame sizes. Didn't work though - people like 29ers. Personally I don't care either way, I just want to be able to walk into a shop and buy what I need if I slice a sidewall so whatever is most popular probably works for me.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
666 Posts
So I've recently been thinking about mulleting my sb165 for more compliance and rollover but when I had a 2.8 plus on the front I was plenty happy with it...just the squirm on my narrow rims was a bit more than I wanted. I really don't know why 27.5 plus on wide rims is not preffered over 29 on narrow rims...you get similar rollover with more traction and massively more comfort. It really bothers me they may get rid of plus tyres and eventually 27.5. I'm thinking of replacing my 27.5 wheels to wider rims but worried it will be a pointless investment if they stop producing plus tyres soon. I feel pushed by the industry to go 29 for longevity sake even though in reality I think I would prefer 27.5 plus.
want cheap to come back 🤣😋
 

· Rippin da fAt
Joined
·
12,948 Posts
I believe the one thing that is commonly forgotten in the conversation and in the industry (even outside of MTB) is there are many solutions for many people and their needs based on personal reasons and the terrain they ride. Unfort the industry will push a certain way for monetary reasons and everyone follow which causes premature death on products. I find it nearly comical to see the big push on “progressive geometry” and the ability to go up and down mountains at blinding speeds all at the expense of practicality. Not everyone rides that way and not everyone is a 20 something rider. This spot is no different than many. What the pros are riding is what sells to the populace,,,, for big money. From my vantage point there are many people out there casually riding around in the woods for whatever their reason and many of the choices available are either way more bike than needed or the wrong choice. I could care less if my tires “squirm during cornering” or are “ too heavy and draggy”. They simply work for me and my hardtail as does my Fattie. A 6000 dollar FS 29’r carbon bike will not bring any more to the plate for me than what I am riding now other than bling factor. Its all about choices and hopefully those choices remain.
Eloquenty said!

Pfft! My ~800g tires are lighter than so many 2.WTF offerings, as are my 4.8" fatbike tires! Couldn't agree more on the bit about tire squirm. Being as light as I am, my Middlechild believes I am a Ti mountainbiker! 😁 With the returns I receive from my 3.0's on i45's frankly, that cannot be replaced by anything less. Am I hoarding tires since I cannot stomach the idea of the dictator jamming 2.small tires in my grill. Another excellent point, 6k+... That is smack dab into the custom territory and beyond. The red S would like to sell me one of their production bikes without choices of dimensions and angles let alone material (Ti, plastic stainless or 4130) which is unacceptable at that range. C'est la vie.

And, yeah, my tires have wrinkle lines on em cause I make em squish a little when I'ma groovin~ Good times!!
 

· always licking the glass
Joined
·
4,568 Posts
What sacrifice? Either a frame is well thought out or is designed with inherent limitations, which would be also in the realm of inherent flaws.
I look very carefully at features of each frame I sign a check for and determine if there are reasons to pass.
Plenty. Some fit some 2.8 but not others. It wouldn't kill them to make them a hair wider to fit a bigger tire to clear and allow for mud clearance.
 

· Rippin da fAt
Joined
·
12,948 Posts
Plenty. Some fit some 2.8 but not others. It wouldn't kill them to make them a hair wider to fit a bigger tire to clear and allow for mud clearance.
That is an inherent flaw at the wholesale level...

Y'all sure you're not in a cult?
F u c k the cult, they cannot ride bikes!

Meanwhile, I am guaranteed to be riding 3.0's for many years, against the wishes of the dictator. That is anarchy at its finest.
 
1 - 20 of 111 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top