Another new wheel size you could not make it up.

foy

Another new wheel size has just come out 27.5+ what the hell is going on, me thinks more marketing bulldung of the highest degree and specialized are guilty yet again!

cooldad

You mean 27.5+? Welcome to 2014.

Antm81

I detect the same broken record about how everything is specialized's fault.

rockmonkeysc

I blame Trek. It's likely to make 142 & 135 rear hubs obsolete.
Upgrade to 27.5+ and next year it will be made obsolete.
I'm sticking with what I have until it's dead. I can't see 3" wide tyres being any good in mud anyway so no use in this country.

swod1

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I blame Trek. It's likely to make 142 & 135 rear hubs obsolete.
Upgrade to 27.5+ and next year it will be made obsolete.
I'm sticking with what I have until it's dead. I can't see 3" wide tyres being any good in mud anyway so no use in this country.

Yeah I don't get these new wheel standards as what we have is fine as even axle sizes are changing how stiff do we need our bikes to be.

I'd best stock up on hubs for my hard tail 26er bike which by coincidencly a trek Lol.

lawman

I'm normally one to defend the industry but it really is getting silly now. I can kind of see why plus sized wheels might be good on a hardtail for the extra comfort, but the full sis bikes I've seen from the likes of specialized, Rocky Mountain and Salsa just seem a bit pointless, kinda like full sus fat bikes. I'll stick with my regular 650b wheels thanks.

The Rookie

I didn't think it was actually a new wheel size, just fatter more trail/Enduro orientated tyres on what was previously just an XC wheel size (and before that a less well known roads size, so still not a new wheel size as such)....

oodboo

Another foy topic having a dig at specialized. Zzzzz

rockmonkeysc

oodboo wrote:

Another foy topic having a dig at specialized. Zzzzz

I believe it was Trek pushing this one. Specialized were the last of the big manufacturers to jump on 650b

oodboo

RockmonkeySC wrote:

oodboo wrote:

Another foy topic having a dig at specialized. Zzzzz

I believe it was Trek pushing this one. Specialized were the last of the big manufacturers to jump on 650b

Yeah but it's just foy having another dig at specialized. I think someone riding a specialized stole his girlfriend or is riding his mum or something.

rockmonkeysc

3" DH tyres? We already did that and they were too heavy and didn't work in anything but bone dry, not too dusty conditions and they don't roll. That's how we ended up at 2.5" as pretty much a standard DH tyre width.
With a super wide rim to support these monsters you can't just quickly swap tyres to fit a narrower mud spike, you need a narrower rim (like the ones we already have).
I can see this going full circle and ending up back at old fashioned 26"

njee20

Aside from Nokian Gazzaloddis there are very few 26x3" tyres, it's not really the same thing as B+ or 29er+ With XC type bikes and wide rims using these parts. They're not DH bikes/parts/tyres. Look at the Trek Stache.

Don't really get it myself, but WGAS.

rockmonkeysc

This time next year we will all be digging out the old super wide Sun Double Track rims which are back in fashion.

njee20

But the DH tyres of old would basically only fit DH bikes, so there was no need to differentiate. I'm not aware of anyone sticking 3" Gazzaloddis on a lightweight rigid XC bike... Whether marketing bollocks or what B+ is an entirely different use case for those parts.

rockmonkeysc

But aren't these 26"+ tyres aimed at DH? No one is going to want them for xc

njee20

No, they are designed for XC use - this is 29er+, but still:



And the "6Fattie" 650B+ Stumpjumper is clearly of the normal 'trail' bike ilk:



That's my point. This isn't just reusing DH tyres, this is something totally different. Even if people were sticking 3" DH tyres on XC/trail bikes 15 years ago you certainly didn't have Trek and Specialized making bikes to facilitate it!

Giraffoto

foy wrote:

Another new wheel size has just come out 27.5+ what the hell is going on, me thinks more marketing bulldung of the highest degree and specialized are guilty yet again!

Dear me, you do have a thing about Specialized, don't you?

In this case, it's a new standard that makes a bit of sense. The circumference of a 27.5+ wheel with the big fat tyre in place is just fractionally larger than a 29er with a regular sized XC tyre - so you could fit 29er wheels on a 27.5+ bike. If you were to get one of these "6Fattie" machines and then decide that you don't always need its snow and sand capabilities, you could invest in a pair of 29er wheels and tyres and have two bikes for the price of one and a bit.

lostboysaint

RockmonkeySC wrote:

I blame Trek. It's likely to make 142 & 135 rear hubs obsolete.
Upgrade to 27.5+ and next year it will be made obsolete.
I'm sticking with what I have until it's dead. I can't see 3" wide tyres being any good in mud anyway so no use in this country.

That.

njee20

Err... Well done?

rockmonkeysc

cyd190468 wrote:

njee20 wrote:

But the DH tyres of old would basically only fit DH bikes, so there was no need to differentiate. I'm not aware of anyone sticking 3" Gazzaloddis on a lightweight rigid XC bike... Whether marketing **** or what B+ is an entirely different use case for those parts.

Mine was a 2.7 and it was on the back of my xtc

Why on earth would you put a DH tyre on a light xc bike?

cooldad

RockmonkeySC wrote:

cyd190468 wrote:

njee20 wrote:

But the DH tyres of old would basically only fit DH bikes, so there was no need to differentiate. I'm not aware of anyone sticking 3" Gazzaloddis on a lightweight rigid XC bike... Whether marketing **** or what B+ is an entirely different use case for those parts.

Mine was a 2.7 and it was on the back of my xtc

Why on earth would you put a DH tyre on a light xc bike?

Australian. Probably very drunk.

njee20

RockmonkeySC wrote:

cyd190468 wrote:

njee20 wrote:

But the DH tyres of old would basically only fit DH bikes, so there was no need to differentiate. I'm not aware of anyone sticking 3" Gazzaloddis on a lightweight rigid XC bike... Whether marketing **** or what B+ is an entirely different use case for those parts.

Mine was a 2.7 and it was on the back of my xtc

Why on earth would you put a DH tyre on a light xc bike?

Moreover why put one on the back?

rockmonkeysc

njee20 wrote:

RockmonkeySC wrote:

cyd190468 wrote:

njee20 wrote:

But the DH tyres of old would basically only fit DH bikes, so there was no need to differentiate. I'm not aware of anyone sticking 3" Gazzaloddis on a lightweight rigid XC bike... Whether marketing **** or what B+ is an entirely different use case for those parts.

Mine was a 2.7 and it was on the back of my xtc

Why on earth would you put a DH tyre on a light xc bike?

Moreover why put one on the back?

Maybe he had a real bad problem with pinch flats and wanted the massive volume and reinforced sidewalls on the back.

KnobbyGeek

foy wrote:

Another new wheel size has just come out 27.5+ what the hell is going on, me thinks more marketing bulldung of the highest degree and specialized are guilty yet again!

I can't find 27.5+. Is that different than 27.5? Could could provide some links?

If you mean 27.5, that is old to very old news depending on how you look at it. Since 27.5 is really 650b. Of course its wide spread adoption to mountain bikes is relatively new.

The constant churn in sizes is irritating. I bought a 2014 27.5 mountain bike to replace my 2002 one and as far as I can tell the only interchangeable parts are the bottom bracket and the seat post. Handlebar diameter is bigger (to what gain?), head tube diameters are different (not much gain except probably stronger with shorter head tubes), more rear cogs (beneficial, but mine is 10 and 11 is here), and disk brakes (much improved). And of course the 27.5—29 didn't work for me and I felt 26 was going away. I think 27.5 is better for me than 26, but not worth the trouble of changing. 26 will still be around for decades, but for serious components I bet that 27.5 will dominate. Come back in five years and we'll find out if that was a good decision. I keep bikes for a long time.

rockmonkeysc

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/artic ... 7-5-42832/

27.5+ is wider rims and tyres which means wider forks, frames and hubs. Your 27.5" bike is now obsolete.
You can upgrade to the latest standard only for it to be replaced a year or two later. It's now making more sense to keep bikes longer.

ProBiker55

ahaha, another marketing scheme. Love how they added the + after the 27.5

njee20

It's a different set of components, what did you want them to do? Call it 27.5, and then have people find they couldn't actually fit the bits to their bike?