26, 650b or 29er in the long run?

welshkev

i'm in the market for a new bike, but it's going to be bought on finance as i'm skint and can't afford to shell out all in one go.

my question is, what do you reckon will still be around in 3 years time (when I would've stopped paying for the bike) I don't want to buy a 26" if next year they become obsolete and vice versa with the others. i'm liking the look of some of the 650b bikes but will they be the Betamax of the bike world?

this isn't a what's best question, it's a what will still be around question....opinions please

EH_Rob

there's a few frames that'll take both 26 and 650 id think, but i wouldn't base your decision solely on that.

The Northern Monkey

Can't see 26" going away (not in 2-3 years anyway) Far too much currently out there at the mo.

If you were asking about 9sp-10sp, I'd say get at least try to get 10sp out the box. 9sp is being slowly phased out by the looks of things and an upgrade to 10sp could be costly.

clamps81

Think they'll all still be going. 29" is huge in North America, 26" has been around so long that it's well established and there'll still be a market for ages now and 27.5/650B is being adopted by almost everyone (manufacturer wise) with real enthusiasm. Were I buying now, I think I'd at least give 650b a test ride to see if it suited me. Also worth looking at bikes that are 650b and 26" (think the Banshee Rune is one) to give you some flexibility

The Rookie

As said, lots of 26" stuff and it will be around for a long time, many 26" frames take 650B (there is a website that details those tried and succeeded) a 650B tyre is only 1/2" bigger radius than a 26er and my Carrera would take a 650B no probs.

So depends on your budget, if 29er suites you, get one, if 26er suites you, get one, if you fancy 650B but just not yet, get a frame that is upgradeable in 3-4 years as your wheels and forks are getting tired!

welshkev

cheers guys.

I do like the look of the 650b but it's a bit pricey right now. so I think i'll stick with a 26er

Thewaylander

www.bikemag.com has an article on 650b to 26" at the moment..

f.all difference except 26" cheaper.

benpinnick

That Bikemag article is a pile of. You go and ride a 650b and you'll notice the difference between them... but only when you go uphill, they definitely have more grip, riding along you can barely tell them apart, which is a good thing IMHO. I think 650b will have replaced 26 for new bikes within 3 years.

supersonic

But a 26er with a big tyre can have more radius than a 650B with smaller one. The more I think about it the more I think the size is a bit daft and born out of some manufacturers needs to jump on the wheel size bandwagon, but not commit to 2ers as they think there could be money here. Most people I speak to notice very little difference.

benpinnick

Thats a bit of a pointless statement SS - A big 650b tyre will always be bigger than a 26 one. I think its better to think of 650b as 26+ - Its the same, but just a bit better. For alot of people that is going to appeal. 26 was just an arbitrary size choice originally that stuck - turns out other sizes probably work better. Sure its more marketing and sales driven than genuinely a performance revolution, but thats just what people said when FS first came out.

The Northern Monkey

benpinnick wrote:

think of 650b as 26+ - Its the same, but just a bit better.

In what way?

supersonic

My comment was aimed more at those upgrading the 26ers to 650b - if you are going to use the biggest tyre that fits the frame and forks, then it doesn't matter if it is a 26er or 650B. Also there is a big lack of tyres at the minute (and might be in the future) for 650b.

Choice is good yes, but this is an expensive route to no (or little benefit, in some areas - and less in others) benefit from I have seen and ridden.

EH_Rob

They're better in the way that you don't really need to bother getting one.

benpinnick

They have more grip (due to larger contact area) and improved roll over. Not so much I would recommend ditching your 26, but if you were in the market for a new bike I would definitely consider a 650.

supersonic

Do you know how much bigger the contact area is for a given tyre?

The Northern Monkey

isnt' weight more too? bigger wheel = more weight? bigger tyre = more weight?
potentially more flex in the wheel?

benpinnick

SS No, but I do know that it will be bigger all other things being equal (volume etc). Bigger wheels do mean more weight of course. Flex wise I dont think you can tell, but I guess its always going to be a bit flexier when you have like for like.

supersonic

The contact area is the same for a given pressure. The shape changes, it elongates by roughly 5%.

benpinnick

so its 5% bigger contact area then? Or are you saying that 29ers also have the same size contact area as 26/27.5?

supersonic

No, the shape changes. For many tyres ie not over or under inflated (but at the same pressure within the range), then the contact area under pressure is the same.

There can be slight variations as nothing is perfect but bigger radius does not = more contact area for a given pressure. The shape is the important part.

benpinnick

But then are you saying that 29ers dont have a larger contact area when the pressure is the same? Yes or no?

Barrelmaker

There are quite a few bikes out there with adjustable dropouts so you could run 26 or 650b. And some 26er forks will take a 650b rim.

supersonic

They don't have a larger contact area. A = W/P (area, weight, pressure). To maintain this, the shape of the contact patch changes.

Now things can get complicated as tyres have knobbles. In some scenarios more may be in contact with the ground, others less.

adamfo

benpinnick wrote:

But then are you saying that 29ers dont have a larger contact area when the pressure is the same? Yes or no?

No they don't. If the weight and tyre pressure are the same the total contact patch area is the same. The 29er has more traction because the contact patch is slightly thinner and longer.
Imagine Citroen 2CV wheels bolted onto a Golf GTi with spacers. The car would have more traction in the snow but dramatically less lateral grip because the contact patch is long and thin not short and wide. The amount of rubber touching the ground is of course the same.

cooldad

Why would the contact patch be thinner if the tyres are the same width?

lawman

adamfo wrote:

If the weight and tyre pressure are the same the total contact patch area is the same. The 29er has more traction because the contact patch is slightly thinner and longer.

So the contact patch is not the same then is it?!

The Rookie

lawman wrote:

adamfo wrote:

If the weight and tyre pressure are the same the total contact patch area is the same. The 29er has more traction because the contact patch is slightly thinner and longer.

So the contact patch is not the same then is it?!

Where does it say that bright spark?

Area=lengthxwidth (effectively) so longer and thinner will be about the same right?

welshkev

So, which will be around longer?

ddraver

Giant looking like they re going 650b -= http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/news/artic ... ted-37015/

I'm in the market for a new bike and was choosing between a 29er HT or my first 120mm odd FS bike. The likliehood is that either of them would have been Canyons. I was also thinking that a 650b AnthemX so that article is particularly interesting...

I ve gone with the 29er now becasue I want to see how the wheel debate works out in the long run (think 29in HT's are here to stay). I reckon that a 650b 120mm FS might be the perfect balance between the "fun" of a 26er with the "speed" benefits of a 29er

Make of that what you will...

(shameless plug - my 29in experience is on my blog )

cooldad

650b is just for indecisive people, big? or small? bugger can't decide.

ddraver

I'm a very average guy....