[webmonkey365]

I hear some people arguing that all this wheel-size talk is just crap. I understand that sentiment perfectly. It truly doesn't matter what wheel size you're riding, so long as you are actually out there riding. I'm simply interested in the tipping point and how we reached it with so little debate this time around. Most new products are met with serious skepticism--650b, on the other hand, was given a global, sloppy kiss and a free pass. I find that odd.

The Web Monkey Speaks: A Strange Love Affair

 

[johnbryanpeters]

Perhaps in part it means that those of us who resisted 29" during the initial period of suck remember a lot of the discussion. When my '07 Heckler finally dies, I suspect that I'll finally take a deep breath and shift to 650b and through axles and a bunch of improvements that have happened over time.

Even that may not happen because I got bitten by the fatbike bug this year and the Heckler has gathered a lot of dust while I have bumbled around on a Surly Moonlander with a big fat grin on my face.

 

[intibike.com]

soul riding didnt know about wheelsize!

 

[stackout]

I think you that part of the surprising willingness of the market to accept an entirely new platform is a reflection of aging consumers, increased confidence in the economy, and the amplifying affect of social media. I posit that mountain bikers are getting older, want a more forgiving ride, perceive their finances to be improving, are seriously considering a new bike for the first time in a while, the entire perception of the market response is being artificially inflated by online chatter that may or not actually reflect consumer behavior, and the advent of 27/650b is far less revolutionary than the early innovations the author compared it to.

First, the MTB market is getting older and wealthier. Those customers have got their kids out of the house, have more free/vacation time, and relatively greater job security. Their retirement accounts are looking very good right now, and their perception of the economy is better than it has been in years. Thus, there are more customers out there with more money who are willing to throw it at the next big thing.

More importantly, I think that many MTBers have been stretching out the life on their last bike, and may have missed much of the gradual innovation over the past five years. Many of them are probably riding XC or older trail bikes that had a number of compromises that the more recent crop of efficient pedaling, slack, longer travel, lighter bikes have largely eliminated. Thus, they are ready to buy new rather than upgrade, and that makes the financial impact of the new platform less onerous, especially since they may very well have the wrong head tube diameter, axel(s), and BB, and are probably on a 3x drivetrain, and possibly 9 speed as well. If you are going to start from scratch, why not get the hot new thing?

Finally, I think that the overwhelming sentiment that 650/27 is the world conquering wheel size probably has to do with the fact that, unlike the introduction of 29ers or the prior innovations, rather than nervously ponder the change with your riding buddies and the local shop guys, now there is a constant barrage of countless posts reiterating the same marketing points and rider reviews. These reviews are generally much more positive that the early days of the other innovations simply because the wheel size is no where near as big a change - thus, consumers are having their positive inclination being constantly reinforced - even if half-heartedly.

 

[joeg]

broadcasting your own platform's irrelevance to consumers and product trends is an honest approach

 

[Mr_TREAD]

Well said. In South Africa, where marathon and stage racing is immensely popular, 29er appreciation is still exceptionally high. Such is the 29er conviction. Some brands (such as GT) don't even bother importing 650b wheel size models to South Africa. I test ride around 50 MTBs a year and can honestly say I have fun and fulfillment on all three wheel sizes... I started mountain biking in 1990 and still, daily, appreciate suspension, tubeless tyres and hydraulic disc brakes. Daily.

 

[jbculligan]

The 650b tap was primed for 10+ years by the 29 movement... we all loved our 26 wheels - in fact we probably never would have even thought much changing anything - but as the 29ers got better and better and there was so much talk about them -- curiosity gets activated, people start planning their move to 29, etc.

But it still seems slightly foreign... especially if you ride a lot of awesome singletrack... something about it just doesn't feel quite right... enter 650b. There is zero debate if a larger wheel has benefits ... and there is zero downside moving from 26 to 650b, zero risk - the bikes are good, the geometry/links/pivots figured out - with the 29 platform paving the way for many years... what's the risk? 29 has some risk, will it fit, is it too different, will i really love it? but 650b - you get the benefits, with no risk...

bottom line - 650b is not really a game changing tech like suspension fork, rear suspension, disc brakes, etc... it's a simple scaling issue, its just a sizing move and a small enough change to make it easy to adopt with no real reason to resist other than cost...

I think the real bizarreness is that 650b is a roughly 4.5% increase in size... all this hubbub about a very small increase -- maybe up to 10% with bigger tires, etc... but i admit after being a stubborn resistor - i could feel a difference when riding so im as guilty as any marketing geek touting this stuff... not a $8k difference, but there's something there...

 

[tripfisher]

I pretty much agree with jbcullinghan. The 29er movement has set the stage. It's opened peoples minds to the advantages of larger wheels at the same time making the disadvantages common knowledge. If I was a serious XC racer, I would have bought a 29er because they do seem to be faster in XC conditions but I'm more about having fun trail riding. I don't want a bike that is so long and heavy in the front that I can't easily lift the front end or whip through a tight turn. So I've held off despite the overwhelming hype. Damn glad I did. Also I feel somewhat vindicated.

 

[Mytchell]

Perhaps the average rider's height is increasing. I am 6'2" with an astonishing "ape index", and I am seeing more and more tall young riders on the trails. Though a Luddite by confession, I first swung a leg over a 29er in 2002 and was instantly sold. Finally a bike that FIT. I was no longer teetering over those little wheels.

So, yes 29ers were not what they are today, but neither were 26ers. Suspensions and geometries have improved across the board. 29's did have the uphill fight of gaining support from parts manufacturers and a lot of geometry re-thinks.

What if the industry is matching itself to the population's physical proportions? Sounds like more 26er's were dropped in favor of 650 than 650 taking over 29er share. At least I hope. As a tall rider, 29 fits too well to think of taking even a 1/2 step back.

Thanks for the column.

 

[flipsidem]

I don't think the 650b really has been accepted by the market. The local bike shops I frequent have very few 650b bikes in stock, and it isn't because they are selling out. It seems like every bike and component company has committed to 650b, but the products aren't actually to market yet. I also think it doesn't really matter if 650b is accepted by the market or not. 650b is going to happen because hardly anybody was buying 26er bikes anymore anyway. Right, I know, long travel 26ers are still 26ers, but what % of bikes sold in a bike shop are big downhill bikes? Almost none in my neck of the woods (Denver). The way I see it is that 26ers are basically dead, and the bike industry is either going to sell very few 26ers along with a bunch of 29ers, or they can bring something new to market to fill some of the whole that the disappearing 26er is leaving. I have only had the chance to ride one 650b myself, and it was in the parking lot of the bike shop. It was also a full suspension, which I don't normally ride. I rode it over every obstacle I could find, and it seemed good. I kept smacking the pedals on stuff, but I think that was because the suspension was too saggy, not because the BB was too low. I am definitely curious about how the 27.5 wheel size will feel on a really light carbon hardtail on a XC race course.

 

[MrBlimp]

The way I see it is that this new tire size is just a marketing device to boost sales. I have been riding and still ride 26 for many years. When 29 came out I wasn't laying out the cash to get another bike just to get the experience of bigger tires and some very slight frame geometry changes. I won't be doing it for 650b either.

When I bought my 30 year old son his MTB I went with 29 because it was the predominant design at the time. I would have preferred sticking with 26 so our bikes matched (parts, tires, etc...) but there weren't too many available options at the time. So 29 it was.

When I decided to buy a second bike to keep at the cabin, so I no longer had to carry mine back and forth, I also went with 29, for the same reason.

I have no intention of buying another new bike anytime soon so I will continue to ride 26 and 29 depending on where I am. Frankly the feel isn't all that different.

The way any market works, and it took the bicycle industry decades to learn this, is that if the industry isn't constantly coming up with newer so-called better models and designs, it will die. And that is what the 650b design is really about.

Think about the life span of the 27 1\4 road wheel. It lasted for decades before changing to 700 and has stagnated since as the industry standard.

It could be the MTB wheel is still going through that process. Maybe 29 was too far and 650b is just large enough to be better than 26 where 29 was too large. Time will tell. Maybe there will soon be a 635 or a 28 before the industry realizes that people aren't going to constantly buy new bikes just because the manufacturers and designers say their new design is needed.

If the MTB industry doesn’t standardize on a tire size they will start annoying their customer base. Frankly, with three sizes in the last 10 years, I can’t believe it hasn’t already happened.

 

[hbelly13]

Vernon, I am a long time reader of Bike dating to the late 90's. This is going to be my 27th year of mountain biking (Farmer John tires, Yeeeeah!!!). Many people could describe me as an early adopter. I went clipless in '92. I bolted my first suspension fork on in '93, full suspension bikes in '97, disc brakes/long travel fork (still miss that Z1!) in '99, 20mm thru-axle in '00 and a dropper post in '05. I have not a single regret with any of these and still use some current incarnation of all of them. I never saw any of these as being trendy, but rather smart and useful innovations for how I rode. They simply improved my experience.

Along the way, I read about and heard of riders getting stoked about 29'ers. I began demoing them in some fashion every year starting back in '00/01. At that time they were clearly pointed at XC riders having twitchy geometry and minimal if any travel. I however, favored the nasty riding embodied by the freeride and then all mountain catch-phrases so I never expected to be all that impressed with the big wheeled bikes. I never was.

I still like riding in nasty terrain and it was only within the last two years that I rode a 29'er that I did not despise. Every 29'er I ever rode until then regardless of price felt awful with handling like I was atop a bar stool after being over-served. The Kona Honzo changed that with it's (then) radical slack front end and steep seat angle. It was not trying make the bike ride like an XC sled, but instead allowing the wheels to really work like they could to mow over everything. After riding it for a day I told everyone that this would become the dominate geometry for trail/AM bikes. It pretty much has with minor variations. The Honzo still felt tall, but now I could ride the bike as I would my own (Heckler/Nomad/Butcher) with the added wheel size benefits.

I was almost ready thereafter to pull the trigger on a long travel 29'er when the 27.5's came flooding in over the last year. I had the opportunity on several occasions to demo newer 27.5 rigs on the exact same loop back to back against my then current rig. On each demo it was the noticeable difference b/t wheels that caught my attention versus the bikes themselves. These bikes had the geometry too, but they possessed the increased momentum and roll over ability without the weird geometry compromises of the majority of 29'ers. It was enough of a difference to make me move to buy one while getting away from a 26'er that I thought was great.

I believe that the early folly of the 29'ers primed the pump for the 27.5 onslaught. The geometry on these bikes is better that anything the 29'ers ever had when they arrived. I could easily ride a long travel 29'er now, but I prefer the maneuverability of smaller wheels for the kind of riding I enjoy. Simple as that.

 

[Mr. K]

Seriously, I don't mean to sound self deprecating, but I switched to 650b because I wasn't a talented enough rider to ride 26. It takes skill and cojones to ride 26 where I ride. 26 makes riding a bike in the woods fun too. 650b doesn't do that for me! 650b just makes it easier for me to ride technical stuff without being scared. You can't ride 29'ers on the East Coast. My only issue is every current bike sold on the market today have low bb height specs. The low geometry doesn't work as well here in the East Coast as well as it does out in the West Coast. Thanks for listening. Be nice to each other on the trails!

 

[DJ68]

Can we have too many choices, i think not. Thank you bike industry, keep improving your products. For me my ride of choice is a 29" SS hardtail, did i have as much fun on my 26" SS hardtail, yip! But the 29r is the better tool where i live as for being faster or at least you feel less beat up. Horses for courses and i'm fortunate my height dosen't compromise my choice, but maybe the bike industry will.