[rockofullr]

And why are you talking about skis??

To draw a comparison to another sport where larger equipment can theoretically make you go faster. If bigger is always better because of increased straight line speed and improved maximum cornering force, then everyone should be riding 180+ skis. But they're not cause no one is silly enough to think one length of ski is better for everyone.

I said that wheel size will have greater implications for traction/rollover characteristics than frame size. Are you seriously disputing this?

No, I'm saying that rollover and traction are not the only ride characteristics that are important to going fast and winning races. Frame geometry and fit to your body will also determine how much of that traction you can actually access while riding.

To repeat what I said earlier, a smaller person actually needs less traction to accomplish the same change in direction when compared to a larger person. A smaller person will also be affected more by increases in his bike mass and inertia/momentum.

Like I was saying, I think this argument that 29er DH bikes exist so that taller riders can have a bike that fits them is a red herring. The real reason is the competitive advantage that the bigger wheels offer. Why did a shorter guy like Danny Hart try a 29er? The Syndicate (as well as Intense IIRC) tried to get the jump on everyone at the start of last season by rocking up with 29er bikes while the rest of the field was on 650B. Kind of a shit move with an advantage that only lasts as long as it takes other companies to jump on the 29er bandwagon. Race to the bottom sort of stuff. It's a shame that there wasn't a 'bro code' for wheel sizes like there was for skinsuits.

I think the "competitive advantage" of large wheels is the real red herring. Danny Heart bought the BS and tried big wheels and proved my point. Bigger wheels do not give a small rider a competitive advantage. The dude looked like he was 12, struggling down the course on his dad's bike.

If this "competitive advantage" were a thing Gwin should not have been able to overcome the rollover speed advantage of his competitors on such a rough course in Lošinj.

And how is running the equipment that will make you fastest a "shit move"? What did 29" wheels ever do to you? Did you notice that Minnaar (big dude on a big bike) makes 29" wheels look like normal size hoops?

The 29er is a bigger bike, but that doesn't need to be the case. They could have just made the 650b bike that big. That's got nothing up do with wheel size and everything to do with the design choices that they made.

The 29" bike is bigger because it has to be, not because they wanted it to be. Notice I compared the medium? That's cause they don't even bother to make a small! This is my point, 29" wheels won't work for small riders, especially on long travel bikes.

Everyone wants long, low, short(ish) chainstay bikes. You can't actually accomplish low and short(ish) chainstais with 29" wheels on a small bike. How are you going to make a bike with the same front end height when the axle starts higher off the ground? You can't, without making the head angle super slack and lengthening the wheel base. So now you have a small dude with a bike that is either too tall or too long and too slack.

I know a woman who's probably 4' tall, maybe... She had a 26" Titus extra small frame and couldn't stand over it without tilting it a little. She's a good rider and a level 3 ski instructor too. She asked me one day "Brian told me to get a 29'er so I'm going to start looking. Any recommendations?". I told her to go to Hunters Gallery. She asked "they sell bikes?". I said "No, they sell guns so you can kill Brian.". The handlebar would literally be in her line of sight for fuck sake.

This is an extreme example but illustrates my point.

My girlfriend is short and even the XS frames in 27.5 can cause stand over issues for her. She looks just plain silly on a 29er. Honestly I think small folks (people who fit on an XS frame) should be yelling and screaming for the return of 26" wheels.

I'm 5'6" and ride a canfield Riot. A 29er trail bike makes sense for me. But I still buzz my ass with the tire with more travel than 140mm the chainstays will need to be longer not to castrate myself. I wouldn't want much longer chainstays since being short , short stays make it easier to move the back around. (True for everyone but 17.5 feels like s bus to short guys)

For shorter travel bikes, I think 29ers are more reasonable for average size folks. But I'm 5'11" and long travel 29" bikes just feel huge and unmanageable compared to a 27.5

 

[FlipSide]

For shorter travel bikes I think 29ers are more reasonable for average size folks. But I'm 5'11" and long travel 29" bikes just feel huge and unmanageable compared to a 27.5

Interesting!

I'm 5'7" and I am about to drop a ton of $$$ on a new bike in the next few months. I was thinking more and more about a 29" monster truck kind of bike since they seem to be the hot thing now that the manufacturers has them figured out, allegedly. The terrain I ride is typically very rocky and rough. I was thinking about an overforked Instinct or an Instinct BC...or a 2019 Troy or Spartan 29er that is rumored to be coming.

I should probably reconsider and look for a 27.5 with 2.5-2.6 tires...or at least make sure I try a big 29" (size small I guess) before purchasing anything.

 

[Cerberus75]

Interesting!

I'm 5'7" and I am about to drop a ton of $$$ on a new bike in the next few months. I was thinking more and more about a 29" monster truck kind of bike since they seem to be the hot thing now that the manufacturers has them figured out, allegedly. The terrain I ride is typically very rocky and rough. I was thinking about an overforked Instinct or an Instinct BC...or a 2019 Troy or Spartan 29er that is rumored to be coming.

I should probably reconsider and look for a 27.5 with 2.5-2.6 tires...or at least make sure I try a big 29" (size small I guess) before purchasing anything.

It depends how fast you're going. Where I live there's a lot of slow tech and and my Small Riot works great. I could probably handle another inch in wheel base before I wouldn't like riding the bike. But 27.5 I can ride longer.

The new Ripmo might fit right. But it is long bike. Curious about the new Devinchi

 

[rockofullr]

or at least make sure I try a big 29"

If you are spending a bunch of money it would be worth it to try to demo the bikes you are looking at. Most shops will roll over the cost of a demo into the cost of your bike if you buy with them.

Don't take what I say as gospel. I'm between sizes so what size I ride makes a difference. I get along with 29ers better as mediums and I prefer larges when riding 27.5 (also depends on brand sizing).

 

[StiHacka]

I'm 5'6" and ride a canfield Riot. A 29er trail bike makes sense for me. But I still buzz my ass with the tire with more travel than 140mm the chainstays will need to be longer not to castrate myself. I wouldn't want much longer chainstays since being short , short stays make it easier to move the back around. (True for everyone but 17.5 feels like s bus to short guys)

Try the Riot with 27.5 wheels and a 160mm 27.5 fork and you'll never want to go back to 29.

 

[FlipSide]

If you are spending a bunch of money it would be worth it to try to demo the bikes you are looking at. Most shops will roll over the cost of a demo into the cost of your bike if you buy with them.

Don't take what I say as gospel. I'm between sizes so what size I ride makes a difference. I get along with 29ers better as mediums and I prefer larges when riding 27.5 (also depends on brand sizing).

I usually hate trying demo bikes, but I guess it will be mandatory in this case.

Good info! I am in-between small and medium for most manufacturers. We'll see and should be interesting! Last time I purchased a bike, there was only one wheel size!

 

[Cerberus75]

Try the Riot with 27.5 wheels and a 160mm 27.5 fork and you'll never want to go back to 29.

I've been tempted...a lot. I've thrown my wife' Process wheels on it and really like it but the BB is too low for my trails toying with the idea of 160 and larger lower cup. My trails have a lot of slow rockcrawing type stuff that the wagon wheels help a lot. Thinking about giving the mixed wheel thing a try. Then decide.

 

[Cerberus75]

If you are spending a bunch of money it would be worth it to try to demo the bikes you are looking at. Most shops will roll over the cost of a demo into the cost of your bike if you buy with them.

Don't take what I say as gospel. I'm between sizes so what size I ride makes a difference. I get along with 29ers better as mediums and I prefer larges when riding 27.5 (also depends on brand sizing).

True I prefer a medium 27.5 and small 29er.

 

[StiHacka]

I've been tempted...a lot. I've thrown my wife' Process wheels on it and really like it but the BB is too low for my trails toying with the idea of 160 and larger lower cup. My trails have a lot of slow rockcrawing type stuff that the wagon wheels help a lot. Thinking about giving the mixed wheel thing a try. Then decide.

I ride in New England, we have tons of crap like this:

I find the low CoG helping even in slow rock crawling situations. You can just thrust the front wheel over and into stuff without worrying about going OTB.

 

[mrgto]

My 26” Megatrail still rock crawls over east coast dirty south chunk with its low bb. You just have to pedal right

 

[Cerberus75]

My 26” Megatrail still rock crawls over east coast dirty south chunk with its low bb. You just have to pedal right

I'm in the Mid Atlantic. I'm tired of having to ratchet. But I do love the lower COG you can track stand longer.

 

[Cerberus75]

I ride in New England, we have tons of crap like this:

I find the low CoG helping even in slow rock crawling situations. You can just thrust the front wheel over and into stuff without worrying about going OTB.

Honestly the 29er go with most having a higher stack is why I started riding them. I'm heavy on the forks and don't feel like going over.

 

[jstuhlman]

i’ve had no problems in chunky nc backcountry on my unrideably low 2650bromad...i did have to think about my pedaling a bit more than usual for a few rides, but keep in mind i dropped almost an inch and a half in bottom bracket height and had been riding the previous bike for 8 years...i know it’s cliche industry-speak but the only word i can think of to accurately describe how the bike feels is “planted”.

 

[Cerberus75]

i’ve had no problems in chunky nc backcountry on my unrideably low 2650bromad...i did have to think about my pedaling a bit more than usual for a few rides, but keep in mind i dropped almost an inch and a half in bottom bracket height and had been riding the previous bike for 8 years...i know it’s cliche industry-speak but the only word i can think of to accurately describe how the bike feels is “planted”.

I'm open minded. And WNC is where I vacation twice a year. How low is your BB? The Riot in 29er is 350mm i think it's too high. 335-340 seems ideal to me.

 

[jstuhlman]

I'm open minded. And WNC is where I vacation twice a year. How low is your BB? The Riot in 29er is 350mm i think it's too high. 335-340 seems ideal to me.

330mm - bike is in the high setting. 170mm cranks.

 

[shelteringsky]

To draw a comparison to another sport where larger equipment can theoretically make you go faster. If bigger is always better because of increased straight line speed and improved maximum cornering force, then everyone should be riding 180+ skis. But they're not cause no one is silly enough to think one length of ski is better for everyone.

Okay, so there are so many differences between skiing and biking that it's not a useful comparison at all...

No, I'm saying that rollover and traction are not the only ride characteristics that are important to going fast and winning races. Frame geometry and fit to your body will also determine how much of that traction you can actually access while riding.

So yeah, if a bike doesn't fit you well, then you probably won't be able to ride it fast. Pretty obvious.

To repeat what I said earlier, a smaller person actually needs less traction to accomplish the same change in direction when compared to a larger person. A smaller person will also be affected more by increases in his bike mass and inertia/momentum.

Another not very useful statement. What do you mean by 'smaller' person? Someone who is lighter in mass? Or shorter? Or both? Keeping in mind that people have different body types and the 6"3 bean pole could be the same weight as a 5"10 beefcake and they would have different sized bikes.

I think the "competitive advantage" of large wheels is the real red herring. Danny Heart bought the BS and tried big wheels and proved my point. Bigger wheels do not give a small rider a competitive advantage. The dude looked like he was 12, struggling down the course on his dad's bike.

So you don't believe that larger wheels have better rollover characteristics, are more stable at speed and help smooth out the trail??? This is the competitive advantage. Again, why do you think Hart tried the 29er bike in the first place? It wasn't that he was looking for a bit that would 'finally fit' him.

If this "competitive advantage" were a thing Gwin should not have been able to overcome the rollover speed advantage of his competitors on such a rough course in Lošinj.

Because Rock Jesus. Gwin is next level.

And how is running the equipment that will make you fastest a "shit move"? What did 29" wheels ever do to you? Did you notice that Minnaar (big dude on a big bike) makes 29" wheels look like normal size hoops?

Serious question: what do you think about skinsuits?

And the point about Minnaar, again. Yes, taller riders will fit 29er bikes better. Not disputing this. But again, they're not switching to 29ers for a 'better fitting bike'... Notice that guys who aren't as tall as Minnaar (e.g. Eddie Masters) are also jumping on 29er bikes.

As for what I have against 29er DH bikes: again, the advantage only lasts until other people start running them; you'll pretty much have to buy a new bike to run the wagon wheels; courses will probably become straighter because they corner like poo; bigger wheeled bikes lose their playfulness and don't jump as well. I could go on...

 

[DMdh]

It´s fact that 29" are actually faster over the lenght of the track? and, how much faster? do we believe the famous number of 3 secs over a 2 minute track? I really dont buy it.

Because assuming so, would mean that all the sindicate guys last year were more than 3 secs slower than their actual times, which would make them midpack riders (which I dont believe they are). The truth is that their results stayed the same when they had 650b or 29".
In the other hand we have trek, and specially gee, who tried the 29" and came back to 27.5, including this year´s opening round, a track which in theory its a perfect match for a big wheeler (rocks and straight lines).

And just I something I noticed, nearly all of the big wheelers that are coming to production, have the travel reduced to 180mm, when some enduro bikes already have that much travel, so.... are they slowly killing dh bikes ?

 

[SuboptimusPrime]

330mm - bike is in the high setting. 170mm cranks.

My new GG is exactly the same BB and cranks. It's just right if you like low--the stuff I was getting away with in corners earlier this week was surprising even to someone used to low bikes and good tires. That said, any lower and I'd have trouble clearing stuff even with cranks level. You have another 20mm of travel on me so you win the low BB brinksmanship award!

 

[StiHacka]

My new GG is exactly the same BB and cranks. It's just right if you like low--the stuff I was getting away with in corners earlier this week was surprising even to someone used to low bikes and good tires. That said, any lower and I'd have trouble clearing stuff even with cranks level. You have another 20mm of travel on me so you win the low BB brinksmanship award!

My bastardised Riot now sits at 13.00" with 160/140 f/r. I am a cheater so I have 165mm DH cranks on it.

 

[Cerberus75]

My bastardised Riot now sits at 13.00" with 160/140 f/r. I am a cheater so I have 165mm DH cranks on it.

I'm running 165s, but I've got short legs. Sorta on topic I'm considering the small wheel Riot. I've yet to find a 29er big bike that fits and will have the WB I'd like. But the Canfield Balance fits perfect with 10mm more spacers. I'm to sensitive to switch wheel sizes all the time.

 

[slyfink]

I think you are all stuck in 2013: https://www.pinkbike.com/news/Pinkbike-Poll-650B-wheels-Forced-Upon-Us-or-Worthwhile.html

I also think you are doing the lizards work for them with this poll.

 

[Electric_City]

I'm in the Mid Atlantic. I'm tired of having to ratchet.

Try a Hadley, CK or I9 hub. High engagement is a mandatory part of my bike builds anymore. When I went back to low engagement for a couple of days, I realized how great they really are.

Ps. I have 3 sets of Hadley hubs. Guess which one I recommend?

 

[Cerberus75]

Try a Hadley, CK or I9 hub. High engagement is a mandatory part of my bike builds anymore. When I went back to low engagement for a couple of days, I realized how great they really are.

Ps. I have 3 sets of Hadley hubs. Guess which one I recommend?

I've got a Hope and a Nuke Proof, higher engagement let's you ratchet easily lol.
My buddy has Onyx on his Warden and we switch bikes a lot. The Oynx is nice when I'm complaining I haven't done a full crank turn in over a mile.

 

[rockofullr]

Okay, so there are so many differences between skiing and biking that it's not a useful comparison at all...

Right.... Longer skis = better strait line speed and higher theoretical cornering forces yet they don't work for everyone. Not similar at all. Right.... Do you ski?

So yeah, if a bike doesn't fit you well, then you probably won't be able to ride it fast. Pretty obvious.

Hey look he's finally getting the point!! You can't make a small frame with good geometry, 8"of travel and 29" wheels. If I'm wrong show me.

Another not very useful statement. What do you mean by 'smaller' person? Someone who is lighter in mass? Or shorter? Or both? Keeping in mind that people have different body types and the 6"3 bean pole could be the same weight as a 5"10 beefcake and they would have different sized bikes.

Yes, both. Shorter people will in general be lighter. Look it up, its a fact. I'm generalizing. Obviously every person is different. I don't have time to break it down to every body type for you.

So you don't believe that larger wheels have better rollover characteristics, are more stable at speed and help smooth out the trail??? This is the competitive advantage. Again, why do you think Hart tried the 29er bike in the first place? It wasn't that he was looking for a bit that would 'finally fit' him.

Never disputed theoretical rolling speed or other theoretical advantages. The problem is that these advantages come with trade offs. The negatives of bigger wheels will affect smaller people more therefore negating your theoretical advantage.

If rollover and stability at speed is all that's needed to wins races then why didn't Danny go faster with his magic competitive advantage wheels? He was tricked by the hype, like you, and had to learn the hard way that 29" wheels aren't for everyone.

According to your competitive advantage theory he should have been faster. But he wasn't. Proving my theory that big ass wheels don't work for little people.

Serious question: what do you think about skinsuits?

They look silly. Good thing this sport is about looking cool so they banned them! Neon pajamas are way cooler.

And the point about Minnaar, again. Yes, taller riders will fit 29er bikes better. Not disputing this. But again, they're not switching to 29ers for a 'better fitting bike'... Notice that guys who aren't as tall as Minnaar (e.g. Eddie Masters) are also jumping on 29er bikes.

The Masters brothers are around my height i believe (just under 6') and lanky. Solidly in the range of people that 29" wheels might work for.

As for what I have against 29er DH bikes: again, the advantage only lasts until other people start running them; you'll pretty much have to buy a new bike to run the wagon wheels; courses will probably become straighter because they corner like poo; bigger wheeled bikes lose their playfulness and don't jump as well. I could go on...

So you're mad because you can't keep up and want to try to get faster by buying a new bike? And you're mad about course changes that haven't happened yet? The courses have been getting straiter for years, because of what the uci and red bull think is going to get more viewers, not to prepare for the grand takeover of the 29er.

 

[rockofullr]

I think you are all stuck in 2013: https://www.pinkbike.com/news/Pinkbike-Poll-650B-wheels-Forced-Upon-Us-or-Worthwhile.html

I also think you are doing the lizards work for them with this poll.

Leave us alone. We're arguing about stuff on theinternet. That's what it's for.

I'm running 165s, but I've got short legs. Sorta on topic I'm considering the small wheel Riot. I've yet to find a 29er big bike that fits and will have the WB I'd like.

Quoted for truth

 

[Kanye West]

29er. For a reason other than wheelsize (mainly).

I want a DH bike that's built around fairly upright geometry and a taller front end. I want that thing to feel like a dirt bike. That is, if I ever bother to ride a DH bike again. It's been a couple years since I've even ridden one, much less spent a lot of time on one.

But if I were to get another DH bike, it'd probably be a Devinci Wilson 29er or that Rotec 29er. They just seem long and low and mean.

 

[kidwoo]

I think you are all stuck in 2013: https://www.pinkbike.com/news/Pinkbike-Poll-650B-wheels-Forced-Upon-Us-or-Worthwhile.html

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/Pinkbike-Poll-650B-wheels-Forced-Upon-Us-or-Worthwhile.html

I wish I was stuck in 1993. It would be easier to work on my truck.

I also think you are doing the lizards work for them with this poll.

Now ridemonkey is putting out moles to do all the insidious data farming that pinkbike has been doing for years to sell it to advertisers.

 

[Kanye West]

Now ridemonkey is putting out moles to do all the insidious data farming that pinkbike has been doing for years to sell it to advertisers.

I sincerely hope they're farming my content and making decisions based on it.

 

[Udi]

@rockofullr @shelteringsky
I didn't want to interrupt, but I think you think you're arguing while actually agreeing? Interesting discussion and all valid points!

The internet: where you should always disagree to agree, even when you actually do.

 

[shelteringsky]

Hey look he's finally getting the point!! You can't make a small frame with good geometry, 8"of travel and 29" wheels. If I'm wrong show me.

In my opinion I don't think you can make a good DH bike with 29er wheels. Like I said, the big wheels corner and jump like poo. That's half the fun of DH. But if you want an example of a shorter rider using 29ers, you'd do well to check out the Commencal team, who are all running 29ers this season including Myriam Nicole who is 5'4"...

Yes, both. Shorter people will in general be lighter. Look it up, its a fact. I'm generalizing. Obviously every person is different. I don't have time to break it down to every body type for you.

As there are different body types and considering you may have a tall rider that is the same mass as a short one and would likely be on different sized bikes. Talking about the interplay of rider mass, inertia and traction is not helpful as there are too many confounding variables (bike size, wheel size, wheel base length etc.). That was my point.

Never disputed theoretical rolling speed or other theoretical advantages. The problem is that these advantages come with trade offs. The negatives of bigger wheels will affect smaller people more therefore negating your theoretical advantage.

If rollover and stability at speed is all that's needed to wins races then why didn't Danny go faster with his magic competitive advantage wheels? He was tricked by the hype, like you, and had to learn the hard way that 29" wheels aren't for everyone.

According to your competitive advantage theory he should have been faster. But he wasn't. Proving my theory that big ass wheels don't work for little people.

In Danny's case, seems like his 29er was slapped together quickly, with geometry that wasn't optimised and not much ride time. To say that they can't work for smaller people isn't exactly true e.g. Myriam Nicole. But yes, I don't think that 29ers are for everyone. There are some people who may have an ideological issue with them e.g. Bruni. And for some people, the trade off of a bike that can monster truck through the rough stuff isn't worth losing the nimbleness and being able to throw the bike around. That may be Danny, but I don't know. And then there's Gwin.

They look silly. Good thing this sport is about looking cool so they banned them! Neon pajamas are way cooler.

Yeah, not totally on board with the neon pyjamas either. But they do look better than skinsuits and are safer. Considering the sport is becoming increasingly commercialised, especially with RedBull on board, image is important. Helmets without visors would be faster as well, but cannonballs look ridiculous.

So you're mad because you can't keep up and want to try to get faster by buying a new bike? And you're mad about course changes that haven't happened yet? The courses have been getting straiter for years, because of what the uci and red bull think is going to get more viewers, not to prepare for the grand takeover of the 29er.

I'm cynical about the direction mountain biking is going to be honest. I think we're all being led up the garden path a bit with this changing wheel size business (amongst other things like 'flow trails' and 'enduro'). I don't think we've really been that much better off going to 650B, let alone moving to even larger wheels. Considering companies have limited R&D budgets, I can't help but wonder what technological innovation for things like suspension, brakes, frame designs etc. we've missed out on because companies have been devoting their resources to trying to jam bigger wheels into their bikes instead.

 

[Udi]

The real question is if/when this takes over is, where does it end?
Sure 29 might be a bit faster on some tracks, and maybe if/when it takes over, tracks will become a bit open and straighter (we've seen it happen already) and 29 will be faster all round. But what's stopping the industry from then going "just wait 'til you hear what we've got coming next", and surprise surprise it's 30", then 31" - smaller teams / companies and privateers have to rebuild everything each time this happens, and everyone wonders why their brakes stopped working.

I honestly enjoy riding more after switching to 27.5" (most people who are still aggressively on the 26 bandwagon haven't actually put a full season on bigger wheels on the same type of bike, IME) - it's BOTH faster AND more enjoyable for me - and with that perspective I think I'd probably get along with 29" if/when I have to switch to keep up pace with my buddies without taking on more risk when riding. There will be some upsides and downsides sure, but humans are pretty adaptive, she'll be right.

But it's a HUGE expense to switch, and being forced through that each time the industry wants to pad their wallets is a joke - at least stuff like boost / 35 clamp bars / 15mm axles you can avoid for as long as you desire, because they result in ~zero time difference. Wheel size is different in this respect, it does create a handicap in many cases (for various reasons) if everyone isn't on the same size.

There's a reason that homologation and vehicle dimensional restrictions exist in most racing sports (at every level of competition, from the miata series to F1), and it's usually to keep racing about racing, instead of about money - for teams, privateers, and punters alike.

 

[iRider]

There's a reason that homologation and vehicle dimensional restrictions exist in most racing sports (at every level of competition, from the miata series to F1), and it's usually to keep racing about racing, instead of about money - for teams, privateers, and punters alike.

Why not use either-or-rules? Either you are allowed to use a 29er or a skinsuit and bullet helmet on a 26er/27.5er. So the privateers could keep with a low budget up against the big guys. Ben Cathro is the best example for this, with his Fort Bill result in the black skinsuit a couple of years back.

 

[rockofullr]

@rockofullr @shelteringsky
I didn't want to interrupt, but I think you think you're arguing while actually agreeing? Interesting discussion and all valid points!

The internet: where you should always disagree to agree, even when you actually do.

This is Room 12A right?

 

[rockofullr]

In my opinion I don't think you can make a good DH bike with 29er wheels. Like I said, the big wheels corner and jump like poo.

Just for reference how tall are you? (I'm guessing you're between 5'8" and 5'11" based on your feelings about 29ers )

I'm cynical about the direction mountain biking is going to be honest. I think we're all being led up the garden path a bit with this changing wheel size business (amongst other things like 'flow trails' and 'enduro'). I don't think we've really been that much better off going to 650B, let alone moving to even larger wheels. Considering companies have limited R&D budgets, I can't help but wonder what technological innovation for things like suspension, brakes, frame designs etc. we've missed out on because companies have been devoting their resources to trying to jam bigger wheels into their bikes instead.

First of all, flow trails are awesome! You must not be riding the right flow trails.

I don't like 29" wheels on long travel bikes myself but there are plenty of people that they work for (tall folks, people who don't care how the bike descends as long as they can bang out 30 miles in a ride) and it doesn't appear that 27.5 is going any where so really we have just ended up with more options on how to setup our bikes.

what's stopping the industry from then going "just wait 'til you hear what we've got coming next", and surprise surprise it's 30", then 31"

The fact that the bikes will be too big for normal people? Will they also introduce a new line of 6'5" lizard/European hybrid riders to attempt to dethrone Gwin and his dam 27.5 freedom hoops?


PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

I've found a 29" bike that I absolutely love riding. And surprise surprise it's a short travel bike. I've always kinda liked short travel bikes with big hoops. The wheels smooth out what the suspension would on bigger bikes but the bike can still be a reasonable size since you don't need the wheel to move much. But short travel bikes generally have stupid XC geo so I never really got the full package that I would want.

So what bike? The SB100. It rides like the 5010 on crack. So poppy and aggressive and fast. I really didn't want to give Yeti their bike back.

 

[toodles]

So what bike? The SB100. It rides like the 5010 on crack. So poppy and aggressive and fast. I really didn't want to give Yeti their bike back.

The Transition Smuggler and Kona 111 have such rabid fanbases that there must be some merit to the whole aggressive geo, short travel 29er thing.

 

[SuboptimusPrime]

The Transition Smuggler and Kona 111 have such rabid fanbases that there must be some merit to the whole aggressive geo, short travel 29er thing.

You're not wrong. Really enjoy my Banshee Phantom--same idea as the smuggler and 111. Very fun bikes.

 

[Udi]

I've found a 29" bike that I absolutely love riding. And surprise surprise it's a short travel bike. I've always kinda liked short travel bikes with big hoops. The wheels smooth out what the suspension would on bigger bikes but the bike can still be a reasonable size since you don't need the wheel to move much.

Okay before we get too carried away jumping to conclusions, it's pretty clear neither you nor shelteringsky (while you both make valid and useful points) have actually put any significant time on a 29" DH bike - either from factory or a non-29 bike with corrected geo - which is possible on a rare few options like the 27.5" Gambler (just like the 26" version before it which neatly transitioned to 27.5" while keeping reasonable CS length).

I know the one guy on here who has a tonne of experience with riding numerous actual 29" DH bikes (and jumps back and forth between wheel sizes regularly) likes them, recently the mullet apparently which I'm personally a fan of too, but has been staying quiet as to not get involved.

I'm not a huge advocate personally for the reasons I gave - mostly cost / waste, also course style changes - but remember, just because you don't ride stuff where both large wheels and large travel are of benefit - doesn't mean it applies globally. I'm a big advocate for the value of theory to model various MTB scenarios, and in most cases good theoretical models are very relevant and accurate (stuff like brake force/throw and effective wheel-rate curves are clear-cut, clear-magnitude answers) - however wheel sizes are one where it's hard to judge the actual tradeoff between the positives and negatives without spending significant time on both. The reason is because the magnitudes of changes in traction, bump absorption, offset, mass, and inertia (in various directions, simultaneously) of a wheel size change are hard to relate to all at once, particularly factoring in more adaptation required than with other areas.

Again - not necessarily disagreeing - just pointing out you're drawing conclusions based on your own situation, which I know for a fact definitely doesn't apply to everyone here.

 

[jonKranked]

 

[djjohnr]

Had to bunny hop a rattlesnake this weekend. Trying to decide, would that situation be better handled by 26, 27.5 or 29?

 

[jstuhlman]

Had to bunny hop a rattlesnake this weekend. Trying to decide, would that situation be better handled by 26, 27.5 or 29?

dude. 29er woulda rolled it. ALWAYS.