Advantages of a 29er ? Take 2

RandG

OK, simple question, what are the advantages of a 29er ?

I don't want a link to 26 V 29er topics, I don't want arguments or petty name calling (see other thread) etc

All I want to know is, what benefits does it have over a 26er.

lawman

Exactly as cooldad eventually explained in your last thread. They roll better and perhaps have more grip, but are less flickable, lively and IMO less fun. Try it, if you don't like it, no loss to you. Personally not a fan, but it's open to interpretation.

ste_t

There are many. There are also disadvantages. Personal preference obviously plays a big part.

The search function is your friend.

ddraver

you have to try one bud, none of us can give you a proper impression just using words...

RandG

I understand the conception of having to try one, however, where ? I'm unlikely to buy local, as I have my eye on one or two online.

I'm seriously tempted due to the type of riding I do, mainly LRT, wide open xc etc. I have a FS for other stuff, so just lookign to find out if it will make my type of riding better/easier/more enjoyable.

lawman

Ring around/email your local bike shops and see if they have some you can try. They're so popular most will have atleast one in stock for you to atleast sit on. Look out for demo days too, last year Rutland cycling did a demo day purely for 29ers.

kenan

You could always join a riding group. We all ride each others bikes and everyone wanted to try my 29ER when I got it.

rockmonkeysc

According to MBUK 26" wheels make baby Jesus cry and 29" wheels will make you irresistable to the opposite sex.
27.5" wheels (which are actually 27") are the new 26" wheels, but in a good way.

The Rookie

Of course 29ers are only really 28 1/2s as well......

I tried a Trek Superfly carbon Elite at a demo day (That's fairly high up the HT food chain then) and yes it accelerated like a Cheetah (more to do with it's weight than being a 29er perhaps!) after an antelope and yes it rolled faster over 'chattery' stuff than a 26er and was a little comfier, I couldn't test for a traction advantage, but in slowish corners it felt big and cumbersome compared to my Carrera (see link in sig) although some of that could have been because I was arriving at corners faster, I can't be sure.

For some rides I'd have taken it over my Carrera, for others I wouldn't, for my local rides I'd have taken mine.

njee20

You could always join a riding group. We all ride each others bikes and everyone wanted to try my 29ER when I got it.

Weird, I've never ridden any of my friends bikes!

I tried a Trek Superfly carbon Elite at a demo day (That's fairly high up the HT food chain then) and yes it accelerated like a Cheetah (more to do with it's weight than being a 29er perhaps!)

I'd really not expect it to weigh that much less than your Carrera though surely? BR had a 2011 one as 10.1kg ex pedals. Stiffer frame/lighter wheels perhaps?

Nowt else really to add, I think a lot of people really over estimate the 'downsides', they're not (now) anywhere near as barge like as a lot of comments seem to suggest.

Mark909

I can't help but feel it's a bit of a marketing scam. I bet in 3 years time companies like specialised will be marketing 26" as the new 29" and will stop selling 29" bikes to make all the mountain bikers who can't think for themselves buy even more new bikes. I can't remember which company it was but someone was marketing full rigid mountain bikes in a magazine with the slogan along the lines of, "Feel the trail how it's meant to really feel". I laughed!

njee20

I dunno, confident that my friends (reasonable XC racers) aren't suckers of marketing, but most have changed to 29ers, don't know of one who's not happy with that change.

The Rookie

njee20 wrote:

I'd really not expect it to weigh that much less than your Carrera though surely? BR had a 2011 one as 10.1kg ex pedals. Stiffer frame/lighter wheels perhaps?

At the time my Carrera was 11.5Kg, however the 2013 I tried is lighter than the 2011 (claimed frame weight is 849g for a medium).

If I were racing I'd have a 29er (all else being 'as equal as possible' of course).

njee20

Yep those new Superfly SLs look the mutts, need to give one a go! Be sorely tempted next time I change. Shame they've gone for XX rather than XX1 on the top one though!

97th choice

RandG wrote:

OK, simple question, what are the advantages of a 29er ?

They are quicker over smooth to moderate terrain, if you have enough relative fitness to maintain momentum.

njee20

They're quicker over rough terrain as they don't get deflected as easily and retain more momentum.

So... They're quicker. What's not to like?!

ddraver

OK - so I did one of them new fangled fancy blog posts on my 29in experience -

http://davekio.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/fun-on-a-29er/

The Rookie

njee20 wrote:

Yep those new Superfly SLs look the mutts, need to give one a go! Be sorely tempted next time I change. Shame they've gone for XX rather than XX1 on the top one though!

It was lovely to ride also confirmed that XT outscored the XX brakes on another bike I tried.

The Superfly I'd have bought (mostly) with my head very fast but very slightly clinical, the Pivot Mach4 with my heart as it was just such fun...

marz

Unless you jump, DH or ride urban trials a 29er will be quicker and more comfortable to ride. The less fun issue depends on which 29er you buy, its geometry and weight, not its wheel size.

I have a Banshee Paradox which rides like a dream and handle's almost every thing I throw at it.

b45her

it is absolutely about wheel size, the benefits and disadvantages all stem from the inertia of big wheels, if your interpretation of mountain biking is riding 50 miles of fire roads and bridleways you'll love them. if you prefer the more technical side of things they simply aren't for you.
the bike makers can spout any bollox they want, a big wheeler will never ever descend quicker than a 26er on anything more gnarly than a bolt straight mildly bumpy trail, as soon as corners, jumps and real bumps are thrown in they are hopeless, the same "momentum" that allegedly makes them roll well also kills their handling, its simple physics, no amount of geometry changes can change the physical laws of the universe.

stubs

You get the right to spout pretentious rubbish all about momentum and speed and angle of attack and conservation of energy and Strava and lap times in the caff, whilst your mates look at you and think shut the fuck up.

Its a bike, you get out of it what you put in.

ddraver

b45her wrote:

a big wheeler will never ever descend quicker than a 26er on anything more gnarly than a bolt straight mildly bumpy trail, as soon as corners, jumps and real bumps are thrown in they are hopeless,

Sorry, I think that's rubbish, it would have to be Extremely twisty turny (and no fun whatsoever) to make that much of a difference.

...but thats only of interest to an xc racer, DHers don't have to consider it, they may have to if 650b takes off but we don't know how that will go yet (cue a load of blind guesses wrapped up in extreme self certainty)

rockmonkeysc

ddraver wrote:

b45her wrote:

a big wheeler will never ever descend quicker than a 26er on anything more gnarly than a bolt straight mildly bumpy trail, as soon as corners, jumps and real bumps are thrown in they are hopeless,

Sorry, I think that's rubbish, it would have to be Extremely twisty turny (and no fun whatsoever) to make that much of a difference.

...but thats only of interest to an xc racer, DHers don't have to consider it.

I can get my Nukeproof Scalp turned faster than I can on my mates Charge Cooker 29er even though the Scalp is a shed load longer and slacker. 29ers don't respond as well to being forced in to a turn fast and slamming them in to a berm just doesn't feel right at all even at lower speeds. There's something wrong when a light weight XC bike won't turn as quickly as a DH bike. I have rode other 29ers (Trek Superfly & Camber 29)
I don't like the way they respond to roots mid turn when cranked over. 29ers are more difficult to manual which is a definite handicap if your trying to ride rough trails fast on a shorter travel bike.
They have the advantage in a straight line, maybe in long, fast turns but on twisty trails they just don't work for me.

ddraver

yes but getting it turned does nt mean you get to the bottom of the descent any faster...

But we re starting the same old boring conversation.... Can we roll back to:-
*some people like them,some dont,
*they suit some trails/riders better than others,
*Try one before you buy your next bike
*unless you re racing XC then they re not going to make a significant difference

b45her

of course it does, if your slowing down in order to corner your loosing speed for the rest of the trail, they are fine for XC and gentle trail riding, if i wanted a bike just to churn out miles on i'd get one straight away, but to do that sort of thing i'd rather jump on my roadie for a few hours.

njee20

b45her wrote:

it is absolutely about wheel size, the benefits and disadvantages all stem from the inertia of big wheels, if your interpretation of mountain biking is riding 50 miles of fire roads and bridleways you'll love them. if you prefer the more technical side of things they simply aren't for you.
the bike makers can spout any bollox they want, a big wheeler will never ever descend quicker than a 26er on anything more gnarly than a bolt straight mildly bumpy trail, as soon as corners, jumps and real bumps are thrown in they are hopeless, the same "momentum" that allegedly makes them roll well also kills their handling, its simple physics, no amount of geometry changes can change the physical laws of the universe.

So a 12" wheeled bike would be even better in the twisty stuff? It's simple physics, no amount of geometry changes can change the physical laws of the universe.

Bike makers/ill informed forum posters, someone's spouting bollox for sure! :roll:

What about Sam Hill (IIRC) testing 650B wheels? No one's told him a BMX would be faster!

ddraver

you re not working with me here guys!!!

cloudynights

we now have 3 different sizes of mountain bike wheels to go at each one is better or worse than the other, the only thing it does is cause arguments, its only been done so mountain bikers spend more money spend maybe the one in the middle is best (650b) maybe not, and maybe we should stop listening to what the yanks say is best

supersonic

Thing is 650b is not that in the middle - if we take 26" (559mm) as the definition, then 650b (584mm) is 27 inch and 29ers (622mm) are 28.5 inch.

njee20

I don't really get why people are so closed minded about wheel size. Disc brakes, suspension forks, dropper posts have all been enthusiastically received. Different wheel size... That's just marketing and about 'separating gullible idiots from their money'.

Very odd.

ddraver

supersonic wrote:

Thing is 650b is not that in the middle - if we take 26" (559mm) as the definition, then 650b (584mm) is 27 inch and 29ers (622mm) are 28.5 inch.

Reports suggest (and I'd hazard a guess that none of us have ridden one so reports is all we have) that 650b are the middle ground in terms of having much of the benefit of 29er with less of the drawbacks...