Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Mtbr Founder
Joined
·
35,503 Posts
It's still ongoing but in the backburner, rumor sez.

I think this 29er board just demoralized them with the good and harsh criticism.

Hey my motto is have thick skin and have some finishiative.

Also, I'd like to guide this board to be a little more level-headed and open-minded.

fc
 

·
Not an O2 thief.
Joined
·
598 Posts
yeah....what's up with that?

My wife and I were out on a ride the other day and out of the blue she says, "What happened in the 26 vs. 29r test they were doing on cyclingnews?"

That was a lot of coin to put out for some sweet frames. I know I went back and forth with him a couple of times about how to "even out" the wheel weight issue. He didn't seem too open minded about it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,238 Posts
francois said:
It's still ongoing but in the backburner, rumor sez.

I think this 29er board just demoralized them with the good and harsh criticism.

Hey my motto is have thick skin and have some finishiative.

Also, I'd like to guide this board to be a little more level-headed and open-minded.

fc
It is also being done by one rider. The bikes were built to fit him. To do this comparison test in the depth he intends it takes a long time with each test repeated several times to reduce the affects of "good days" and "bad days" on the bike.

The longer he takes, the more time on each bike, the more data is collected and the more valid the results.

And yes, this board came down on him pretty hard. He did make adjustments to the test because of it, which also takes more time. I hope he uses 12-18 months before releasing any results.
 

·
Mtbr Founder
Joined
·
35,503 Posts
shiggy said:
I hope he uses 12-18 months before releasing any results.
Ay caramba. 12-18 months in a vacuum with no feedback loop is not a good recipe. The best things on the web are evolved. Put something out there, get some feedback, improve it. Repeat 10 times.

FAQ's are a good example of that. This board, this site needs more FAQs btw.

fc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
CN study

fwiw I am also hearing about reliability issues with the Ergomo power meters which were to be one of the lynch pins of their study. I would not be surprised if James is spending half his time trying to get consistent data, based on the reports I've heard from a fellow coach (and power meter junkie) about erratic power numbers. Too bad cuz I am very interested in the results. Maybe they oughta just get the SRMs.

Jeez one shootout and now I am lurking around the 29er board. Like I need another distraction!

Cheers,
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,238 Posts
francois said:
Ay caramba. 12-18 months in a vacuum with no feedback loop is not a good recipe. The best things on the web are evolved. Put something out there, get some feedback, improve it. Repeat 10 times.

FAQ's are a good example of that. This board, this site needs more FAQs btw.

fc
He received feedback and was able to make changes when it was most helpful - before he actually started doing the bulk of the testing. I think there was enough comment made about his procedures for him to make relevant changes. Now getting consistent results is the goal. As kretzel brought up there can be issues when comparing different power meters. Until you have something reasonably valid to report there is no reason to release it.
 

·
On your left.
Joined
·
1,188 Posts
disagree / agree

It is totally valid to post the result that there won't be results. And explain why. If it isn't doable with the resources they have then the difference between 26" and 29" wheels is probably negligible. I personally think the reason 29" wheels are gaining popularity (and why my next bike will be a 29er) is that there isn't definitive proof which wheel is better (efficiency, handling, etc.). Lack of info is very powerful. Personally I think, hmmm, this 29" thing is interesting, but the only way I can determine if it is legit is if I buy one myself. And of course I have to spec it equivalent to my FS race bike to make a fair comparison!

I wonder if CN is running into a bit of conflict of interest. As a news source they are supposed to report on the industry, but this comparison has the potential to affect the industry. I do agree that they must feel a lot of pressure to make sure the study is very scientific.

shiggy said:
He received feedback and was able to make changes when it was most helpful - before he actually started doing the bulk of the testing. I think there was enough comment made about his procedures for him to make relevant changes. Now getting consistent results is the goal. As kretzel brought up there can be issues when comparing different power meters. Until you have something reasonably valid to report there is no reason to release it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
445 Posts
Oh Oh, I feel a mini rant coming on

Motivated said:
but the only way I can determine if it is legit is if I buy one myself. And of course I have to spec it equivalent to my FS race bike to make a fair comparison!
But why even try to make a "fair comparison"?

Not trying to pick on you here, just using your comment as a spring board to try to make a point about the futility of "matching" up 26 and 29ers to do a comparison.

IMO all that matters in the end is what you get when you optimize your bike,(be it a 26 or 29, HT FS etc etc), not what you get when you try to "match up" for "fair comparisons".

Let me see if I can explain what I mean:

Case 1
Say you have chosen to race XC on a 29er. Will you build up a bike to "match" a 26 XC style bike? I don't think so; I propose you would try to build up your 29er so as to optimize the 29ers strong points while minimizing any weak points for the particular style of race course you will compete on. Who cares what the other guy did to his bike, all that matters in a race is what works for you!

Case 2
If your goal is to race (ride) on long endurance rides, on fairly smooth, rolling ,gravel/fire roads. Would the 29er build match a 26 build. Maybe but then again maybe not. Might be you think a fully rigid but complaint 29 frame with super light wheel set and smaller diameter tires is perfect for this type of ride but for a 26 you might go with an aluminum HT and front suspension fork and larger tires to take the edge off the bumps.

Case 3
You ride on the road to and from your dirt trails so you want a tire that rolls good but still has some dirt capabilities. Will you pick the same size tire, ie: 2.1, 2.3 etc, for your 29 as your buddy does for his 26? Maybe you feel you only need a 2.1 while he feels a 2.3 is better. In each case you optimize for your particular bike and ride styles. (Oh and you will probably use different tire pressure to optimize…....)

So at the end of the day trying to compare a 29 to a 26 by "matching" components and "removing variables" is cass-backwards. The only real test is to optimize both as much as possible/needed for the particular ride conditions, then compare and then choose which is best for you.

Do we all make the same choice, of course not, sort of silly to try!

That said I am wondering along with everyone else what the RESULTS will be.:eekster:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,993 Posts
Do the results matter? It might be fun to read, but I choose to ride a bike because I (a) own it, and (b) like it. Are the results of some efficiency study going to change what or how I ride? Racers may care, but the majority of us will keep riding our bikes and having fun.

Unless he has developed a fun-meter, it's all interesting, but does not effect what bike I choose to ride.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,113 Posts
laffeaux said:
Do the results matter? It might be fun to read, but I choose to ride a bike because I (a) own it, and (b) like it. Are the results of some efficiency study going to change what or how I ride? Racers may care, but the majority of us will keep riding our bikes and having fun.

Unless he has developed a fun-meter, it's all interesting, but does not effect what bike I choose to ride.
Agreed. Not to be insulting, but I won't care one bit what the results will show or not show. I even race occasionally and it still won't affect my bike choice either way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,811 Posts
Some people are treating the outcome like the translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. It's not like the results from the test will retroactively change the way your bike rides. We all made a decision to ride a 29er. Nothing about the CN test changes those decisions. The only difference they might make is to the fence-sitters in the industry that are holding back on turning out 29er-specific products. But there again, Fox didn't offer a 29er fork when you bought your bike so why does it really matter what they do in the next few years?

My opinion is that this is a case of people looking for official industry validation of a decision already made. We all love to be right. If CN comes out favorable to 29ers many of you will use it as ammo to taunt the 26er community. If CN comes out against 29ers then people will gripe about flawed tests and controled environments. Even more likely, given a negative result, the 29er community will throw their hands up and say "bah! they just don't get it!!"

In the end it all comes down to what makes you happy when you ride. A scientific study is not going to make an ounce of difference to how you feel when you are on your bike...where its a rigid SS 29er or a big-hit 26er. Are we so concerned about the details that we've lost the passion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,237 Posts
Memory is slipping but…..

I think the test pilot was a shorter fellow and he should be riding a 26" wheeled bike. Have a rider that is over 6' do a comparison and you'll have my attention.

Also I would have liked the MBA shootout riders to be on at least large frames.:)
 
1 - 20 of 30 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