29er vs 26" performance benefit?

supersonic

Giant have jumped ship early. Spesh are going to fall flat on their arse.

Hob Nob

I'm noticeably quicker on a 29" bike, both XC and AM.

I think a lot of people have opinions based on early adoption to 29", there was some funky geometry that didn't suit much other than flat out XC.

Now there are more trail hardtails popping up, which are different, but no less fun to ride than smaller wheeled bikes. Then there is stuff like the BMC TF01 & Enduro 29, which are scarily fast, and fun to ride.

declan1

CitizenLee wrote:

Assuming you've probably rode various 26" bikes for a good few years before trying a 29er, did it ever cross you mind that 26" was too small and didn't roll well over obstacles, or is it just looking back?

Totally agree that anyone undecided should try them all as opinions are far too divided on the web

Nope, I just thought that was the way it was (which it was) :P

Only since the bigger wheels have appeared have I noticed that they roll over obstacles better.

Daz555

The good thing about 650b is at least it means I won't have to buy a 29er when I replace my bike in a few years time. For a while it looked like 29er was going to replace all before it.

My dislike for 29er is entirely aesthetic. They just don't look right - like a newborn giraffe - a gangly mess.

Will 26" ever come back again to rule the marketing/performance roost?

kammybear

CitizenLee wrote:

A lot of people who jumped early on the 29er bandwagon might disagree but it does look to be going that way. Giant have said they plan to pretty much phase out 29ers over the next couple of years, along with 26" (apart from Glory maybe). I know that's only 1 company but they're not the only one hailing 27.5 as the best thing to happen to mountain biking. Maybe they're right, but I still think for the majority of normal people all the supposed performance gain is simply placebo affect after spunking a wad on a new bike. Especially if it's a different type of bike like changing h/t to f/s etc. I remain unconvinced until I try the exact same model with 26" and 27.5".

The advantages are not a placebo IMO.

I just find that its not worth the trade off when it comes to turning. 29ers feel like tanks,

97th choice

declan1 wrote:

You don't have to believe what they all say. If you don't like 27.5, that's fair enough. I personally find 26ers too small as they don't roll over obstacles very well. 29ers feel way too big but roll over everything as though it's not there. 27.5 rolls over obstacles well but still keeps the nimble handling of the 26er.

I'm saying this out of personal experience and opinion - I think the only way to decide is to ride all three.

When reading this I'm suddenly reminded of two children's fables, the princess and the pea, and the emperors new clothes

Hob Nob

kammybear wrote:

The advantages are not a placebo IMO.

I just find that its not worth the trade off when it comes to turning. 29ers feel like tanks,

Without deliberately trying to be awkward, you need to learn to go round corners then.

The Rookie

Maybe you need to learn to read what was written rather than what you think was written.

29ers do FEEL, slower to turn than a 26er for a number of very good physical reasons, even compared to my few hundred quid Carrera based hardtail a £4K Trek Superfly Elite felt slow to turn and more cumbersome, it doesn't mean it can't corner as quickly, but they do inherently feel slower to turn, hence all the effort put in try and improve it.

thelonegroover

Daz555 wrote:

The good thing about 650b is at least it means I won't have to buy a 29er when I replace my bike in a few years time. For a while it looked like 29er was going to replace all before it.

My dislike for 29er is entirely aesthetic. They just don't look right - like a newborn giraffe - a gangly mess.

Will 26" ever come back again to rule the marketing/performance roost?

I don't think 26" will ever rule again, neither will 29". 27.5 is the natural choice and should have been the wheel size from the start. If it had been, neither 26 nor 29 would have caught on. They may have been considered and tried but thats about all.

benpinnick

Im with the lone groover here. Having spent a lot of time on 26 and 27.5, 27.5 is better IMHO. Its not just about the tyre size, but also the geo you can run. The low bottom bracket on the Whytes that everyone's raving about isn't just low relative to the ground, its low relative to the axles too, and that gives a bike a really nice feel. Some people would say thats only a 12.7mm difference, and they'd be right, but thats a 30-50% increase in BB drop for example. Do that on a 26 and its pedal strike madness. Its not to say 26 is bad, but I think of it like a bell curve. 26 is on the up slope, 27.5 is somewhere near the top, and 29 is on the way back down again. Its a combination of many factors that make 27.5 a bit better than 26 in every way that really counts (except weight). Not saying that 27.5 is the right size, its just the best of the 3 we have to choose from. Maybe 28 would be better, maybe 27 would be better. The reality is we'll probably never know, so make the most of whats available.

I think one of the key factors (beyond parts availability) thats driving this change is the fact that nowadays bike manufacturers really understand the impact geometry has on a bike, far more so than say even 10 years back. Experimentation and evolution has meant we understand far more how half a degree there, 10mm here can effect a ride. Once you know that, you can then plan around how to accommodate wheels while maintaining the 'feel' of a bike much better.

The Rookie

benpinnick wrote:

26 is on the up slope, 27.5 is somewhere near the top, and 29 is on the way back down again. Its a combination of many factors that make 27.5 a bit better than 26 in every way that really counts (except weight). Not saying that 27.5 is the right size, its just the best of the 3 we have to choose from. Maybe 28 would be better, maybe 27 would be better.

Except we have 26, 27 and 28.5 right now (despite the marketing names), so the logical next try would be 27.75 I guess!

IF (yes a big if) I were to change right now I'd give a 650B/27 a try, as it is I'll stick with the 26 or maybe consider converting it to 650B! (Lets see, spokes, rims, tyres, maybe forks, maybe tubes!)

benpinnick

The Rookie wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

26 is on the up slope, 27.5 is somewhere near the top, and 29 is on the way back down again. Its a combination of many factors that make 27.5 a bit better than 26 in every way that really counts (except weight). Not saying that 27.5 is the right size, its just the best of the 3 we have to choose from. Maybe 28 would be better, maybe 27 would be better.

Except we have 26, 27 and 28.5 right now (despite the marketing names), so the logical next try would be 27.75 I guess!

IF (yes a big if) I were to change right now I'd give a 650B/27 a try, as it is I'll stick with the 26 or maybe consider converting it to 650B! (Lets see, spokes, rims, tyres, maybe forks, maybe tubes!)

Actually we have 26.5, 27.5 and 29.5... but thats being pedantic

rockmonkeysc

I think the most important thing it to ride the bike you like the most regardless of wheel size. Each size has it's performance advantages but unless you're racing and competing for top results does a speed difference really matter all that much?
For most people the performance only really makes a difference in the pub when arguing about whos bike is best.
I know a 29er would be faster for me (I tried a Tracer 29 and Remedy 29) for enduro type tiding but I have more fun on 26" wheels.

The Rookie

benpinnick wrote:

The Rookie wrote:

benpinnick wrote:

26 is on the up slope, 27.5 is somewhere near the top, and 29 is on the way back down again. Its a combination of many factors that make 27.5 a bit better than 26 in every way that really counts (except weight). Not saying that 27.5 is the right size, its just the best of the 3 we have to choose from. Maybe 28 would be better, maybe 27 would be better.

Except we have 26, 27 and 28.5 right now (despite the marketing names), so the logical next try would be 27.75 I guess!

IF (yes a big if) I were to change right now I'd give a 650B/27 a try, as it is I'll stick with the 26 or maybe consider converting it to 650B! (Lets see, spokes, rims, tyres, maybe forks, maybe tubes!)

Actually we have 26.5, 27.5 and 29.5... but thats being pedantic

It depends on the tyre size, but as we started at 26" nominal with 2" tyres , referencing from that as being the standard makes most sense!

CitizenLee

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I think the most important thing it to ride the bike you like the most regardless of wheel size. Each size has it's performance advantages but unless you're racing and competing for top results does a speed difference really matter all that much?
For most people the performance only really makes a difference in the pub when arguing about whos bike is best.
I know a 29er would be faster for me (I tried a Tracer 29 and Remedy 29) for enduro type tiding but I have more fun on 26" wheels.

Nail hit squarely in the head.

Thewaylander

I guess for me next year i was thinking of upgrading my bike somewhat and the whole 650b thing has made me consider buying a new steed, now for the benefits of 650b i'd get the newer version of my machine for the most similar handling bike i can find.. but more to make sure as new tech comes out i can access it easily.

That makes me feel grumpy.. as i'm seeing a phasing out of relevant gear for 26" machine in terms of staying on the more cutting edge side of the technology...

rockmonkeysc

Can you give an example of new technology available in 27.5" but not 26"?

Thewaylander

Several new wheel sets i've seen coming out are not in 26" now.

it's small fry at the moment but I', more concerned it will be a bigger trend when it comes to general gear, 650b and 29er getting the most love and then 26" being the realm of heavier duty DH stuff

97th choice

Thewaylander wrote:

I guess for me next year i was thinking of upgrading my bike somewhat and the whole 650b thing has made me consider buying a new steed, now for the benefits of 650b i'd get the newer version of my machine for the most similar handling bike i can find.. but more to make sure as new tech comes out i can access it easily.

That makes me feel grumpy.. as i'm seeing a phasing out of relevant gear for 26" machine in terms of staying on the more cutting edge side of the technology...

General stuff? What general stuff apart from wheels and forks would you worry about being unsuitable for a 26" bike?

rockmonkeysc

You can use 650b forks with 26" wheels as long as you allow for the A-C difference.

Thewaylander

Yup wheels, forks and tyres.

Probably where the most noticble difference in tech goes IMO these days, (except for the 11 speed revolution)

Chunkers1980

RockmonkeySC wrote:

You can use 650b forks with 26" wheels as long as you allow for the A-C difference.

The a2c is the same, it is the bottom of the rim to the ground which is higher.

Thewaylander

going to say wouldn't be my choice to do that.

I guess my biggest worry is tyre choice will become very limited in time, that would be frustrating after paying a fortune to make the bike my ideal bike.

I just love the frame, if the 2014 came frame only i'd get that and boom job done build that up over time

poah

29's look too big and gay Id never buy one

27.5 is what I'll get next, not because I prefer but more than likely you'll not get a 26 anymore by the time I come to buy a new bike lol

at my level of fitness/skill I doubt changing wheel sizes would make a blind bit of difference.

the whole idea of discussing it is kinda pointless almost like discussing what handlebar width to get - each person will be different. only thing you can do is go out and test the bikes and see what you think.

Thewaylander

if its a better post i agree.

but it is interesting to hear peoples point of veiw, and when certain items are only being made in one of the formats it becomes less of a choice thing and more of a buy this if you want to have upto date gear in the future

rockmonkeysc

How does the height of the bottom bracket relative to the height of the axles make any difference?
I can't see a logical reason why it would have any effect.

plugp7

Perhaps rider height is more relevent to wheel size choice. A lot of the small size 29ers just don't look right. You have to ask how anyone can ride them efficiently?

rockmonkeysc

plugp7 wrote:

Perhaps rider height is more relevent to wheel size choice. A lot of the small size 29ers just don't look right. You have to ask how anyone can ride them efficiently?

A friend of mine is 5'4" and gets regular top fives in endurance races on a 29er, pretty quick on tech trails as well.
Rob Cooksley won the 2011 UK gravity enduro series on a Tracer 29er and he's fairly short.
I'm pretty sure height has nothing to do with what size wheels you need. It might not look right but for some short people 29ers can work.

plugp7

RockmonkeySC wrote:

plugp7 wrote:

Perhaps rider height is more relevent to wheel size choice. A lot of the small size 29ers just don't look right. You have to ask how anyone can ride them efficiently?

A friend of mine is 5'4" and gets regular top fives in endurance races on a 29er, pretty quick on tech trails as well.
Rob Cooksley won the 2011 UK gravity enduro series on a Tracer 29er and he's fairly short.
I'm pretty sure height has nothing to do with what size wheels you need. It might not look right but for some short people 29ers can work.

Not quite your average riders, but like you say, it can work for some short riders. Then again, it depends if pure speed is why ride?