is 29er really faster than 26er?

andredechh

Hi,

I do several local races and bigger race (staged MTB marathon) every year. So I currently think to get myself a 29er to replace my 4-year old Giant Anthem. Before i spend my money on new bike, i just want to be sure that 29er will clearly give an advantage to me over my current bike (which still rides very nice and works great).

And if i'm eventually convinced to get a new 29er, should i go for fullsuser or hardtail? My option now is Grand Canyon 29er which sells for EUR1399. I think it's hard to find better bike at this price.

bennett_346

If you don't know what the advantages of 29 inch wheels are, why do you want one? What have you based that decision on?

And as for hardtail/full suss only you can say as it's personal preference.

andredechh

aside from some reviews (with pros and cons) i see more 29er these days but i heard mixed feedback their experience. some sound simply quoting something from magazine article

BikeSwan

If your on the tall side (6'0" +) a 29er will work. I'm 6'4" and ride an XXL SC Tallboy. I can never go back to my old 26" bikes for mountain biking. If your small, or averaged sized it may not be worth going for a 29er. It's common knowledge that 29er's roll over things better, and are grippier (if that's a word), but they also have a less flickable feeling compared to 26" bikes, and they are often heavier. Although my 22.5 lb Tallboy isn't proof of that. Ride one and see how you like it!

bennett_346

You NEED to try a 29er to see if you prefer it over a 26 inch bike, and preferably the same bike but both wheel sizes. The magazines and media talk shite about 29ers so ignore them.

I wish the industry didn't do this to new impressionable riders (no offence to yourself, it's a media problem).

rockmonkeysc

Try a few. Giant do a week long test ride on their bikes.
I have tried 29ers & didn't like the way they handle but I would say it was possibly faster but less fun. The only 29er I have tried & liked was a Charge Cooker which handled like a 26" bike.
Ignore what magazines tell you, get out and ride some. Not sure about the 29er being better for tall riders thing, I'm 6'1" and find my 26" bikes fit well, I have a friend who is 5'6" and prefers 29ers.

andredechh

good suggestions and i'm already impressed now
surely will look for a test bike here in Qatar.

bennett_346

Qatar? Interesting. What riding is there round there then?

cooldad

bennett_346 wrote:

Qatar? Interesting. What riding is there round there then?

Camels?

cycle monster

If you can, hire the same bikes with the different wheel sizes on the same trail in similar conditions, as I did. I was highly sceptical about this 29er business and did so grudgingly. I am 5'9" and now own a Giant Anthem 29er. I rode one of these and a 26er around Rutland Water in the same conditions with my wife who rode the same bike on each occasion. When we were both riding 26ers I was a little bit ahead as usual. Once on the 29er, I was off into the distance. In her words, " I could not believe how fast you were going and you hardly seemed to be pedalling at all!"

I found that that the 29er cornered better, climbing was easier, it rolls easier over stuff and it is very noticeably quicker. My short local loop used to take 45 minutes on a 26er but now takes only 37 minutes on the 29er. Speed is not everything for everyone of course and making riding easier is not for all. However, everyone I know was as sceptical as me at first but having ridden one all are converted and never going back.

paul.skibum

If you arent racing - speed over ground means nothing. For me a mountain bike is a way to have fun and a 26er is fun to ride. Nuff said.

Briggo

paul.skibum wrote:

If you arent racing - speed over ground means nothing. For me a mountain bike is a way to have fun and a 26er is fun to ride. Nuff said.

Why if you aren't racing does speed mean nothing, perhaps an individuals idea of fun is speed.

andredechh

bennett_346 wrote:

Qatar? Interesting. What riding is there round there then?

Basically XC ride - some small hills but no real mountain, the surface is mostly rocky, dusty hardpack.
A pretty boring but that's what i have here. MTB-ers in Oman and UAE are more lucky, there are big hills and mountains.

The Rookie

Given the terrain a 29er sounds ideal, its biggest downside is in tight technical stuff which it sounds like you'll never come across.

andredechh

The Beginner wrote:

Given the terrain a 29er sounds ideal, its biggest downside is in tight technical stuff which it sounds like you'll never come across.

Another good feedback here and that's true..no tight, twisty singletrack here. So OK, i should get a 29er to try on very soon and see if it really gives an advantage. My goal is to finish Trans Hajar 2013 with stronger result.

Sheppy

I have an Trance 26 inch, a few years old now, and a Anthem x1 29er which I've had about 6 months, I would say I am definitely faster on the Anthem 29er. Between 1 and 2 mph overall. I tend to do a set loop which starts with canal towpaths for about a mile (so compacted stones). The speed difference on that is pretty noticeable. Then a bit road work (can't say I can tell a difference here though) then some off road fields for a few miles (anthem seems a bit faster over the moderately rough stuff) then a blast down some steep very rocky (often takes me out when it's frosty) paths and I would say it's hard to tell on that as I'm normally clinging on for dear life
It's about a 6 mile loop which I have done to death so know it very well, Anthem is definitely faster. Whether it's because Anthems are generally faster than Trance (I guess they would be) or whether it's the wheel size I don't know. Maybe it's just the fact it's new and shiny and I feel I should ride faster, either way I'm quicker on it

Actually, to add one more thing, there are a couple of humps which I catch a bit of air off at one point, first time I did it on the Anthem I frightened myself a little as I seemed to going a lot faster over them and going a lot higher as a result :oops:

paulneenan76

I ride with a guy who has a new Giant 29er XTC hardtail and an Anthem 26er. We ride on everything from flowy bridleway, through fields, fire roads, tow paths and even the dreaded road. Now the 29er hardtail is quick on everything - I'm sure he wont mind me saying that he is no whippet, but the 29er helps him on the down, flat and on the ups! Once it gets going it just rips it - you have to see or ride one with some friends to see the difference it makes. I've ridden it for 30mins and its impressive (it is heavy though). However, the bigger dimensions means that once it gets twisty, he backs everyone up. Frankly, you rarely see him on the Anthem. He regrets not getting the full suss in a 29er. But if you've no tight twisty trails or narrow tree lines - it's a no brainer.

supersonic

It really does depend on the model in question. Head angles and geometry vary, just as they do with 26ers. Get it wrong, with either format, and you'll be disappointed.

That said, if you are to generalise, then the 29ers (for a given tyre size) will roll more easily over bumps. The forks and wheels are always going to be flexier and heavier. And the higher position of the rear hub means they are harder to get the front wheel off the ground. This can help with climbing though.

The upshot, as usual, is to try a few models out of all bikes. One isn't faster than the other all the time, XC riders are still using and winning on 26ers. And on the bumpiest terrain out there, DH, 26er is the king.

leaflite

Science seems to suggest that 29ers are faster. However, I have overtaken many people riding 29ers-dont think that having a 29er will make you a better/faster rider. No matter how fast it is, if you keep using the brakes you wont be any quicker

oodboo

BikeSwan wrote:

If your on the tall side (6'0" +) a 29er will work.

Height has nothing to do with it. Different bike suit different people. I've got a 29er hardtail and like it more than any 26er hardtail I've spent time on. I also have a 26er full sus which I'm holding on to for now for the rougher stuff. The only disadvantage I have found with the 29er is the cost of innertubes, I've bought a couple from the LBS for £8 each.

Try different bikes and see what suits you but remember a quick test ride in a car park wont be enough for you to know if the bike will be ok. Took a while before I felt comfortable on my 29er and now my 26er feel weird and slow.

pilch

oodboo wrote:

The only disadvantage I have found with the 29er is the cost of innertubes, I've bought a couple from the LBS for £8 each.

Tubeless = no difference... on the rare occasions i've put a tube in, I just use a 26" one, 29er tubes tend to weigh a ton too

benpinnick

I've tried a couple of 29ers, and I can confirm IMHO they are in fact cheating. Much faster, and actually still fun, although I did find them a little lacking on jumps etc. seem hard to get off the ground, presumably a wheelbase thing.

oodboo

pilch wrote:

oodboo wrote:

The only disadvantage I have found with the 29er is the cost of innertubes, I've bought a couple from the LBS for £8 each.

Tubeless = nooooooooo!

I'm not sold on the whole tubeless thing yet.

The Rookie

According to Schwalbe's website their 29x2.35 tube weighs a massive 30g more than the 26x2.25......althought they do a lightweight that is 40g lighter than the stock 26er one at 140g (and 10g more than the lightweight 26er), clearly pilch's ton fits no known international measurement standard.

pilch

The Beginner wrote:

According to Schwalbe's website their 29x2.35 tube weighs a massive 30g more than the 26x2.25......althought they do a lightweight that is 40g lighter than the stock 26er one at 140g (and 10g more than the lightweight 26er), clearly pilch's ton fits no known international measurement standard.

Check you out.... I'm deeply impressed with your rubber knowledge!.... or did you make a special effort to look that up ?

I prefer my generic 'ton' personally....but then I am an xc weight weanie ;-)

How much are these super light 29er tubes? £8? more? best option is still tubeless IMO, after that a 26" tube < £2 a pop will do the job, but if you are intent on lugging around a 'ton' (NOTE: This description does not fit any known international measurement standard and is just a figure of speech) of expensive extra baggage then that's your choice...

VWsurfbum

I have 2 29ers, I moved over to them after comparing 26" back to back with 29ers over a set lap a few winters ago. i am roughly 10% quicker on the 29er (i'm 5'10" BTW)
I now have the HT for racing and a full suss for fun stuff. OK its no jump bike but it sure handles the bumps better and better for trail centre stuff.

john10012

I think you have to weigh up the pros and cons of 26 and 29" wheels and also try them and decide which is right for you based on your riding.

Just wondering for those who have 26 and 29 inch wheeled bikes, which do you find has the quickest acceleration from the off? I am thinking that 29" may be slightly quicker over a course and time, but that 26" wheels you will get slightly quicker acceleration from the off?

oodboo

I don't think there's a noticeable difference in acceleration, if anything the 29er is faster but they are very different bikes. Are you asking based on personal experience or what you've read?

cycle monster

Before we bought our Anthems, Mrs Monster and I hired 26ers and rode around Rutland water. We were evenly matched on them. The following weekend she was on the 26er again and I was on a 29er. I quickly disappeared into the distance with little effort. She could not believe how fast I was and it did not seem as if I was pedalling very hard at all. My 26er record time for my local short loop is 45 minutes. On the 29er it is a shade under 37 minutes. It takes two or three pedal revolutions to get it up to speed but thereafter it steams ahead. Climbing is easier and faster and going downhill the acceleration is scarily quick.

As always best advice is to try before you buy, however, I do not expect to be quicker on my son's 24" bike any time soon.

bennett_346

Great story however i feel that isn't really mountain biking.

benpinnick

Acceleration is a bit of a myth i reckon, as you wouldn't set off in lowest gear on a 26, probably not even bottom 3 or 4, so youve got lots of gear options to compensate for the bigger wheel.