[Kanye West]

Wall mart will have them. I suspect you'll be able to find decent low end rims that are at least strong for things like snow-bikes and specialty applications like dirt-jump/DS/unicycles (lol), etc. For a long time you'll be able to get rims and parts though, as the molds and mills are already in place and will continue to make as much money as possible before switching. I don't expect any crazy prices though, as it's a balance between not making the buyer give up and move to another wheel size. It'll just eventually phase out. The only guys complaining about not being able to use tri-align brakes or square taper bottom brackets don't want them to win an XC race or DH race and you can still find some of that stuff out there. This is really much ado about nothing, even if they are going to phase it out. Look at the 1.5" steerer manitous. Completely worthless now due to tapered frames. Who cares? Those died a long time ago and for a while you could get plenty of 1.5 all mountain/freeride frames. By now no one cares anymore. Same thing will happen here. By the time you are "forced" to change, you won't even know it because your bike will have cracked or exploded.

That's all working off the assumption that you change frames, forks, and wheels (or just a complete bike) every damn year. Once I find something I like, I just stick with it. My 2010-2012 generation Enduro for instance.

I must say that a rim/tire manufacturer would be absolutely suicidal to just phase out 26" production altogether. There will ALWAYS be significant demand, as long as they are made, and as you stated, upfront tooling and production costs have already been dealt with. No reason NOT to make the most of that for as long as possible, besides blatant marketing crap.

But, it's the bike industry. So, I take the logical, secure, financially sensible long term plan, take the opposite, and expect that.

 

[Jm_]

That's all working off the assumption that you change frames, forks, and wheels (or just a complete bike) every damn year.

No, I'm thinking more like 5 years or more. Seriously, even if most manufacturers switch to 27.5 and 29 for everything except DH bikes in 2 years, you won't see 26" parts go away for at least years after that, not to mention overstock and so on. It won't just vanish, almost nothing does, especially something that has as much presence out there as 26ers. In 5 years though there'll be advances that make us wonder why we were so stupid to use all the stuff we do now. Maybe nothing that makes a DH bike weigh 20lbs, but things to make wheels crazy stiffer, lighter, brakes more effective, more efficient carbon structures, combined carbon stem/handlebars, carbon fiber dropper posts, electronic shifters that have nothing more than a minimalist switch at the bars, etc. We'll get on one of these and it will seem to accelerate like crazy, better than our old lumbering 26ers, and by the time your 26"er stuff is phased out, it'll be 10 years gone by and no one will care.

When I say "26 will die", I just mean in the mainstream sense. Niche markets will still exist, like square taper BBs, drum brakes, snow-bike rims, etc. You may not see some manufacturers offer ANY 26ers, but that doesn't mean you won't be able to get parts or that easton or DT won't still be cranking out 26" wheels/rims for years after.

 

[Kanye West]

No, I'm thinking more like 5 years or more. Seriously, even if most manufacturers switch to 27.5 and 29 for everything except DH bikes in 2 years, you won't see 26" parts go away for at least years after that, not to mention overstock and so on. It won't just vanish, almost nothing does, especially something that has as much presence out there as 26ers. In 5 years though there'll be advances that make us wonder why we were so stupid to use all the stuff we do now. Maybe nothing that makes a DH bike weigh 20lbs, but things to make wheels crazy stiffer, lighter, brakes more effective, more efficient carbon structures, combined carbon stem/handlebars, carbon fiber dropper posts, electronic shifters that have nothing more than a minimalist switch at the bars, etc. We'll get on one of these and it will seem to accelerate like crazy, better than our old lumbering 26ers, and by the time your 26"er stuff is phased out, it'll be 10 years gone by and no one will care.

When I say "26 will die", I just mean in the mainstream sense. Niche markets will still exist, like square taper BBs, drum brakes, snow-bike rims, etc. You may not see some manufacturers offer ANY 26ers, but that doesn't mean you won't be able to get parts or that easton or DT won't still be cranking out 26" wheels/rims for years after.

What I'm referring to is quotes from certain manufacturers that state intent to completely phase out 26" wheels. It can be found in one of the other rant threads about this somewhere. I'm far too lazy to go look it up.

I wish we could make wheels capable of a little more flex and compliance without permanent deformation or durability issues. Crazy stiff wheels ride like crap unless all you're doing is berms all day.

More effective brakes should be priority number one. A single equipment change that would equal legitimately faster race runs would be a change that would reduce braking distances. All the lightweight crap in the world would pale in comparison to the measurable difference that would make.

Super high frequency damping through structures should be somewhere in the near future. Not just the occasional un-calculated side effect of CF layup structures either. The wheel compliance is a start. One of these days someone is going to figure out the importance of fore-aft compliance in the top tube while retaining lateral stiffness, like the development of the CRF frames over the last decade.

I think suspension technology has honestly gotten about as far as it's going to go given the size and weight constraints that are now expected. A little more capacity and a little more weight could go a pretty long ways in terms of high speed suspension performance in this application.

 

[gemini2k]

The great advancement in bike technology would be a tire that has the weight and compliance of a single ply with the durability and flat resistance of a dual ply. That would 'solve' about a million issues.

 

[gemini2k]

By now no one cares anymore. Same thing will happen here. By the time you are "forced" to change, you won't even know it because your bike will have cracked or exploded. There'll be some crazy carbon fiber rims, nano-tech fiber tires and carbon fiber spokes that make the 27.5 wheels accelerate at least as fast as your old 26ers.

Yeah, expecting the same pace of technological advancement going forward is a pipe dream. All the low hanging fruit is gone. Same with moto. Dirt bikes from 2013 ride and feel pretty similar to bikes from 2006.

MTB's are gonna see minor improvements in weight and suspension performance, but nothing serious. It's already happened with brakes. The new shimano stuff isn't any better than previous stuff. If anything it has more problems. Rim profiles and materials are the same as they were in 2005. Tire casings and compounds are the same as 2005. Suspension linkage designs are pretty much the same as 2005 as well (don't give me any of this split pivot nonsense). Geometry is the same as 2001. Minor tweaks here and there of course, but nothing game changing.

Unless some magical new material is invented bikes are gonna stay pretty much the same. But even then bikes would probably take 5+ years to incorporate that material and there is nothing outside of the bike industry on the horizon right now. The bike industry is going to have to adapt just like the desktop PC industry is doing right now, accepting that technological advancement isn't bringing and huge improvements in functionality.

 

[tabletop84]

Marketing may let you believe that there is a linear technical progression but actually it's more like business is struggling with models of planned obscolence to keep the growth going but that won't work till eternity.

Just look at cars: they put all useless **** into them to make you buy them again and again but in the end it's just an overkill on wheels and they will die sooner or later.

 

[Mo(n)arch]

Geometry is the same as 2001

Wasn't the Ironhorse Sunday the gamechanger in DH geometry? When was it introduced? 2005-06?
But yeah, minus the headangle it's still relevant.

 

[jonKranked]

to anyone worried about high end 26" rims / tires being "phased out":

this sh*t is all made in china. those guys don't give a flying fvck about IP protection. All we need is enough people to pool their money, send them a minion (or a dh or whatever) and say "make this". BAM. done. then the only problem is who has the space to store an FEU once it clears customs

 

[atrokz]

At least Mavic seems to understand 2 things:

1: choice is a good thing, so keep both 26" and 27.5"
2: 29ers suck, and no one needs this choice...... (haha)

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/First-Look-Mavic-Enduro-Specific-WTS.html

As long as companies keep 26" in the.....loop.....then all is good in this world.

 

[FlipSide]

I'm sure all of this is just a rehearsal for the main event: The launching of a "superior" wheel size for road bikes.

 

[atrokz]

750abc!

You heard it here first.

 

[tabletop84]

IWhen 29ers began taking over XC racing it was because the field of 29er riders were catching up to the fast guys on 26ers.

needs citation

 

[DH Dad]

In the past couple years multiple mfg have pretty much admitted 29r bikes are not the solution for everyone, beyond obstacles for longer travel suspension they're simply too big for the entire population. SC and Specialized don't even offer a small for the Tallboy/Enduro 29. I foresee 27.5 bikes filling this void and creating an option for DH but not nearly close to taking it over. Junior MTB bikes that were once 24" wheels will grow to 26" wheels and kids 20" bikes become 24" and 16" become 20"... The real loser here is the bottom of the scale, the youth 12" bikes since once they become 16" bikes with slacker angles you won't be able to get anymore 12" components!

 

[OGRipper]

Every manufacture started producing carbon frames because they said that an aluminum frame could not be designed as light and stiff as carbon. Resulting in faster times due to a lighter frame that tracks better due to its stiffness. Meanwhile GT has done the impossible, designed a aluminum frame that is lighter and stiffer than ever DH carbon frame out there.

Your facts here are suspect, and you conspicuously left out strength. Do you have access to weight, stiffness, and strength data for the new GT and the latest crop of carbon DH bikes? Or are you basing this on the fact that Gee won two races?

How do you reconcile what you are saying with the fact that GT just introduced two new bikes with carbon frames and 27.5 wheels?

If you STILL really think carbon bikes are just "marketing lies" it's very hard to take you seriously.

 

[jonKranked]

Your facts here are suspect, and you conspicuously left out strength. Do you have access to weight, stiffness, and strength data for the new GT and the latest crop of carbon DH bikes? Or are you basing this on the fact that Gee won two races?

How do you reconcile what you are saying with the fact that GT just introduced two new bikes with carbon frames and 27.5 wheels?

If you STILL really think carbon bikes are just "marketing lies" it's very hard to take you seriously.

not to mention gt admittedly overbuilt the heck out of the carbon fury.

 

[boogenman]

I don't see trials bikes going to 650b anytime soon. Just sayin

 

[Drth Vadr]

Your facts here are suspect, and you conspicuously left out strength. Do you have access to weight, stiffness, and strength data for the new GT and the latest crop of carbon DH bikes? Or are you basing this on the fact that Gee won two races?

How do you reconcile what you are saying with the fact that GT just introduced two new bikes with carbon frames and 27.5 wheels?

If you STILL really think carbon bikes are just "marketing lies" it's very hard to take you seriously.

No, I do not have torsional strength and stiffness data. I'm going by GT statements as well Gee himself has made in recent interviews and yes, Gee just won the first 2 rounds on the aluminum Fury. GT will produce a carbon version of the new Fury in the near future, that's not a doubt in my mind. The "marketing lies" I'm referring to is the anything to get you to buy approach taken by bike manufactures. The only winner in the game of carbon DH frames is the manufacture charging an extra couple K for .75-1 lb weight savings and low manual manufacturing cost of carbon in Asia.

As I said before, the losers in the 29er movement will swarm like locus to the new wheel size. I find it ironic that so many are all good with being told what they need and what their going to get. We have all seen this before, but this is a masterful coup by the manufactures and constituents.

"Obedience without question loyalty until underverse come."
Lord Vaako

 

[OGRipper]

Do you not see the problem with what you're saying? You are judging all the top carbon bikes by what Gee and GT are telling you about the new Fury, then you get on a high horse about the blind faith of lemmings?

It's true we've seen it before and it's also true some people are too susceptible to marketing. But try to accept that some people are actually trying to make rad stuff even more rad.

PS: I have no idea who Lord Vaako is or what the underverse is, but I imagine it as a happy place with lots of people riding carbon DH bikes in their Underoos.

 

[Tomasz]

I can't believe that this thread has gone from trashing on 27.5s to now trashing on carbon. What's next? We don't need long travel bikes either?

FYI, the weight difference between the V10.5 and the current Demo alu is almost 4lb.

It's morphin time!
-Mighty Morphin Power Rangers

 

[jonKranked]

I can't believe that this thread has gone from ..

welcome to ride monkey from post #1 to full stupid in less than 30 posts

 

[manhattanprjkt83]

when you hear interviews with industry product dev guys, and they scoff at the 'internet conversations'...they are basically talking about this thread

 

[jonKranked]

when you hear interviews with industry product dev guys, and they scoff at the 'internet conversations'...they are basically talking about ridemonkey

fixed

 

[Kanye West]

when you hear interviews with industry product dev guys, and they scoff at the 'internet conversations'...they are basically talking about this thread

I'm thrilled that I can contribute. I love making grief for the general population of half-assed engineers in the bike industry.

 

[GekoES]

I don't see trials bikes going to 650b anytime soon. Just sayin

Nor BMX

 

[marshalolson]

Nor BMX

do i need to get a 650b fixie?

 

[gemini2k]

when you hear interviews with industry product dev guys, and they scoff at the 'internet conversations'...they are basically talking about this thread

Yeah, I'd be pissed off too if people publicly called me out on my marketing bull**** and under engineered products.

 

[Tetreault]

In the past couple years multiple mfg have pretty much admitted 29r bikes are not the solution for everyone, beyond obstacles for longer travel suspension they're simply too big for the entire population. SC and Specialized don't even offer a small for the Tallboy/Enduro 29. I foresee 27.5 bikes filling this void and creating an option for DH but not nearly close to taking it over.

Basically my entire thought process on this from the beginning, and what i tried to explain in my post on page 3, you just managed to put it down in 1/10th of the words

 

[dan-o]

Nor BMX

"For 40-something MTBers nostalgic for their BMXin’ youth, GT also displayed the 650BMX bike, rolling on 27.5-inch wheels. The singlespeed gets a crossbar handlebar, burly three-piece cranks, a V-brake mounted under the seatstays as well as a coaster brake, and heritage graphics recalling the BMX heyday of the ’80s."

Nostalgia?
Heritage graphics?

Sounds like engineering to me.

 

[WestCoastHucker]

20, 24, 26, 27.5(sorry if i'm wrong, i just ride and don't feel the need to keep up on the latest trends), 29, bmx, roadie, fixie, mtb, beach cruiser brethren, whatever, who cares? i know i have fun on anything with 2 wheels myself and if you don't as well, i guess that's your loss. if it's dumping more money into making better products for all of as cyclists collectively in the end, ride what you brought and stop acting like a b!tch about what makes someone else smile...

 

[tabletop84]

when you hear interviews with industry product dev guys, and they scoff at the 'internet conversations'...they are basically talking about this thread

 

[atrokz]

I'm thrilled that I can contribute. I love making grief for the general population of half-assed "designers" in the bike industry.

FTFY


"Designers" could learn a thing or two about how bikes work and most wouldn't cut it in industries like Aerospace or Space unless just drafting.

 

[DH Dad]

FTFY


"Designers" could learn a thing or two about how bikes work and most wouldn't cut it in industries like Aerospace or Space unless just drafting.

Really? You're going to compare Aeropsace to Bicycles? My son was piloting a bicycle quite well at the age of 4 and downhilling by the age of 7. In it's simplest form it's just 2 wheels held together by a frame with pedals and handlebars to drive/steer and a small pad to sit on called a saddle. I'm no expert but I've heard there's a little more involved in the Aerospace industry

 

[atrokz]

The point is, most are 'designers' and not engineers, and to further that point, the marketing sells it like it was designed by the worlds greatest engineers and we'd all be fools to question the ideas that come out of this 'industry'. I'm sure Gemini2K gets my point.

I don't think I've had to explain basic points more in my life than on this forum.

Also, I didn't compare. At all. I just said most wouldn't cut it and that comes from working in it my entire career. That's not a comparison, it's a statement

 

[jonKranked]

The point is, most are 'designers' and not engineers,

that's a lot less true than you'd think. of course, there are exceptions

 

[atrokz]

that's a lot less true than you'd think. of course, there are exceptions

Perhaps. Although, Is one really able to call themselves an engineer being fresh out of school and not yet completed a PEng designation or being certified in their respective field? Intern to Doctors sort of thing? I mean, if we're getting all technical here then perhaps there is even less than you'd think

(I'm just here to ruffle feathers... hehe)

 

[jonKranked]

Perhaps. Although, Is one really able to call themselves an engineer being fresh out of school and not yet completed a PEng designation? Intern to Doctors sort of thing? I mean, if we're getting all technical here then perhaps there is even less than you'd think

well yes, you're not necessarily gonna get the best of the best when it comes to engineers. and aerospace is a much more lucrative career. still, an inexperienced / entry level engineer is most likely gonna do a better job than a designer. just as a point of clarification - when i say "designer" i'm referring to someone with a background in industrial design. i've encountered many of them that can make beautiful drawings, but when it comes to assembling a physical construct of an item, well... i've encountered far fewer designers who also possess engineering skills

 

[atrokz]

well yes, you're not necessarily gonna get the best of the best when it comes to engineers. and aerospace is a much more lucrative career. still, an inexperienced / entry level engineer is most likely gonna do a better job than a designer. just as a point of clarification - when i say "designer" i'm referring to someone with a background in industrial design. i've encountered many of them that can make beautiful drawings, but when it comes to assembling a physical construct of an item, well... i've encountered far fewer designers who also possess engineering skills

I can reflect that experience and I also dated a industrial designer for a lengthy period of time so I know all about that 'scene'. A lot are just drafters too (or, 'CAD monkeys'). You end up seeing some shady stuff from these companies (I'm sure you know some examples) and when looking at who designs for them it makes sense. I'm really just poking fun at the industry and how seriously it takes itself and the entire wheelsize thing.

Edit, I may know my way around a computer, but not grammar apparently.

 

[jonKranked]

I can reflect that experience and I also dated a industrial designer for a lengthy period of time so I know all about that 'scene'. A lot are just drafters too (or, 'CAD monkeys'). You end up seeing some shady stuff from these companies (I'm sure you know some examples) and when looking at who designs for them it makes sense. I'm really just poking fun at the industry and how seriously it takes itself.

oh yea, i hear ya. bike industry, Serious Business™. reading the marketing lit that some companies put out, i can't help but wonder if they were really able to write any of it with a straight face. some of it is borderline farcical.

 

[atrokz]

Unfortunately I must spread rep before giving more.

 

[OGRipper]

20, 24, 26, 27.5(sorry if i'm wrong, i just ride and don't feel the need to keep up on the latest trends), 29, bmx, roadie, fixie, mtb, beach cruiser brethren, whatever, who cares? i know i have fun on anything with 2 wheels myself and if you don't as well, i guess that's your loss. if it's dumping more money into making better products for all of as cyclists collectively in the end, ride what you brought and stop acting like a b!tch about what makes someone else smile...

If you read closely, you will know that you better enjoy those bikes while you can - the zombie marketing apocalypse is coming, and they will take your puny wheels!!