This is what's wrong with The Industry™
- Thread starter Electric_City
- Start date
-
- Tags
- e-bike
-
Two more days to enter the Secret Santa!
Entries must be in by midnight on November 29th. We're kicking off the 2024 Secret Santa! Exchange gifts with other monkeys - from beer and snacks, to bike gear, to custom machined holiday decorations and tools by our more talented members, there's something for everyone.
they're not the only ones.
Meanwhile, I am currently getting a custom painted 853 steel 27.5 hardtail next month.
To hell with what the industry is doing.
nice, what frame?
Every Pro rider under 180cm/6' -** running mullet config**
Bike Manufacturers - "you will buy the 29er, you will love the 29er."
Everyone on this site is so anal about 1mm of BB height, 1/10th of a degree of HTA/STA, .5mm chainstay length and grams of weight. How can dropping the back of the bike by an inch have any benefits?
Ps. Not just DH bikes, but any bikes
Ps. Not just DH bikes, but any bikes
its 3/4 inch difference
Not really.
27.5" wheels are closer to 26 than 29'ers. 13mm I believe. Half that gives you the other 1/4".
Another PERFECT example of "what's wrong with the industry"
Last edited:
For me it's not dropping the rear of the bike. On a properly done mullet the geometry doesn't get compromised, I just want a big front wheel but also not grab the rear tire in my ass cheeks. If I had an inseam over 36" I wouldn't care what diameter the rear tire is.
A 26" tire in a real mountain bike size (say, a 2.5 DHF) is a lot bigger than 26" OD. Doing your math based on the nominal sizes is nonsense.
3/4" is the correct difference in radius.
What I find dumb about the wheel size thing is kids bikes don't have a 26" option anymore. Wheels go from 12", 14", 16", 20", 24", ..., 27.5". Devinci isn't even bothering with the 27.5" anymore. My son is on a 24" Commençal at the moment, and starting to outgrow it. He seems to enjoy mountain biking, so I'm willing to invest a little. I'd also like to get him something that fits. A bike with 26" wheels seems like the logical step. I might even have considered a small 27.5" bike, but forget jumping from 24 to 29. That's just dumb. There are some brands making decent 26" kids bikes (Commençal and Nukeproof), but I don't feel the value proposition is there with those bikes...
3/4 is the amount of axle drop you'd get putting a 27.5 wheel in a 29" rear end - which is what you were talking about in your post; it's half the difference between the BSD of a 29" wheel and a 27.5" wheel (diameter of a 29" wheel is about 1.5" larger than 275). it's a half inch drop if you ran a 26 wheel in a 275 frame (1" diameter difference).
on the flip, when my kid gets big enough for a 26er, the used market is going to be filled with very decent bikes that fit her. There's very little I want to change on my 26" DH bike...but then who rides DH anymore LOL
this is nothing. do i need to post the bottom bracket chart?
as long as it has labeled axes, I don't care
giant trance jr?
I bought a Devinci Spartan 27 LTD in 2018 in order to keep my 26er 2013 Pivot Mach5.7c (size small) in good shape for my son. He will ride it next year.
On the other hand, I bought a 29er for my wife, as I I think the bigger wheels should make it a bit easier for her on rougher terrain. It will be the first 29er to get in the house.
They could literally sell tens of them
Me. I’m lucky enough to get to a lift almost every weekend. I hate that DH bike season is coming to an end.
Giant has a couple: https://www.giant-bicycles.com/us/bikes/mountain-bikes/26-inch
I can tell you my IronHorse is so far off from what's 'necessary' to ride that if not for Rims and Tires going away at staggering nos., I'd just keep riding the thing.
Wanting to follow Vital's latest Forum Thread added to their homepage. Topic is about abandoned Formula 1 Engine Power (mid 2000), putting it on DH bikes because, pedaling is work and gets hard. Literally someone thought out (with all incorrect factoid... likely intentional the post is so utterly F'in stupid) taking a 100,000rpm flywheel that acts as a Capacitor, fit it to a Bicycle Frame in order to have that Capacitive Discharge into electric-assist. As if.
First - it was not whatever F1 Constructor they'd highlighted that even created the Tech - it was Porsche. Porsche the large scale Auto Manufacturer who'd shared it with F1 Engineers - this the KERS power-in power-out electric assist units - and then added it for the 918 Spyder. FiA and F1 found it to be too inconsistent in cost and in production, binned it after 2 season.
The sheer nonsense surrounding a Bike and those who sustain the image nowdays, just shit, shit, shit. One person needs to see such drivel at from the hands of some mechanic at a shop and could instantly flash-forward to an Industry that's high-risk and a loss for securing Capitol, or even worse, land access.
First - if the very concept of pedalling a chosen bike back up a hill in order to ride back down it is too-exhausting then, someone has gone and made poor lifestyle choices and either needs to focus on their physical health and conditioning or...
Second - give up Bicycles. Add motors, enormous tires that do little to add to traction going forward and infact slow the bike down - buy a friggin' Motorcycle.
Is just garbage lovin' for the sake of being on an Internet Site, as opposed to curating a sport w/ history. And, since this Vital member is seemingly affiliated with the Industry, I cringe at the motivational factor for such a thread's creation and, what costs are to be passed on to Consumers in say the next 5 years.
This sport is doomed, literally has become it's own albatross and has passed it's usefulness.
Regardless the style, the Bike that was once an escape from redundant Fossil Fuels is now dependent upon them at disgusting levels. Electric Technology is not free.
What color? I just picked up a used switchback for shitty Winter and generally wet local rides. Decided to freshen it up while I wait for the wheels to arrive (Hope are 5 weeks behind), so it is going in next week for paint.
And that is what is really wrong with the industry! They are all about "we want to be inclusive...more female riders....get more kids into biking....". However, if you look at the data, by offering 29" only bikes they deny roughly 1/3 of the males and 2/3 of the females a bike that is actually properly proportioned. It is great that there are now better options for tall riders, but every time I see a vertically challenged rider having uncomfortable contact with their rear tire, I want the industry persons responsible for that nonsense have 29" of rubber shoved up their asses.
i see the local high school xc kids al the time. they all look like circus acts and can't handle their bikes for shit except the one tall kid who actually fits on his bike...
deep inside, we all died a little bit from that...