26" rims 'on the way out' - ?

[Gravity Aided]

I would imagine with tourers you would need a strong wheel,so a 26" is the way to go IMO

Works quite well in my applications, because a tour may include gravel or dirt roads, as well as paved trails and off road trails. Sometimes with a bit of gear, although my distant touring days are past.

 

[Gravity Aided]

Why is a 26" rim 25% stronger than a 27" rim?

I appreciate the physics of why a smaller diameter will have more rigidity but 25%???

Shorter spoke length and stouter(in many cases) rims make for a stronger wheel, all other things being equal. Also, mountain bike hubs seem more durable, and often have a higher or equal to 700c spoke count. Now, I'm not sure about 25% myself, but my experience is that I have had no broken spokes on tour while using 26", but I don't put the miles in anymore, either, still it is interesting to note that I have broken about 5 700c spokes this year in light touring(less than 30 lbs weight of load in terms of panniers). I might also add that on the 26" tourer, I have several times brought home a weeks groceries across mixed terrain, but only a distance of about 5 miles, over trail, road, part of a park and the sixth green on a golf course, and open ground across a field, then a paved trail and my street to home. (approx. 50 pounds)((weight and expense))

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

How so? I'm on 26 and 27.5, and while there is a difference it's so slight as to not be able to eliminate differences in tyres as the cause.

That's why I said the wheel size wasn't the whole story.

 

[screenman]

Taking the specifical forces imposed diatostically on the outer circumfairiciele of the rimotostraphy area then I would suggest unequal forces applied in differential directions may have differing effecticals, therefore a 26 does not have the same radii as a 27. Simples.

 

[bonsaibilly]

Taking the specifical forces imposed diatostically on the outer circumfairiciele of the rimotostraphy area then I would suggest unequal forces applied in differential directions may have differing effecticals, therefore a 26 does not have the same radii as a 27. Simples.

Good form.

 

[Reynard]

Mrs mrs bike has 24 " tyres, doesnt help me a lot but she is only 4 foot 7

It would help me LOL! 24" tyres is what's on my, ahem, junior MTB...

 

[MarquisMatsugae]

Taking the specifical forces imposed diatostically on the outer circumfairiciele of the rimotostraphy area then I would suggest unequal forces applied in differential directions may have differing effecticals, therefore a 26 does not have the same radii as a 27. Simples.

A big big welcome to Cyclechat's first Albanian member

 

[RichardB]

I'm also a believer in the rigid mountain bike, and I love the old first generation MTBs, so I'm continuing with 26" tires.

Glad I am not the only one. I bought a Raleigh Amazon in 1991 (actually a pair - new relationship, new bikes!) and it is still my favourite bike. Rigid front and rear and 26" wheels. I know it's totally subjective, but I've had drop-handlebar bikes with 27"/700c and that seemed 'right', but I have a Dawes Galaxy Cross with flat bars and 700c and it just feels that the wheels are too big. The Raleigh is a far nicer ride, even though the Dawes has better components. I reckon if I ever buy a new bike it will be a 26", but they seem to be getting thin on the ground these days.

 

[cyberknight]

It would help me LOL! 24" tyres is what's on my, ahem, junior MTB...

YUp , shes on a kids hybrid.

 

[Drago]

Anyone remember the brief trend for 46'ers in the mid nineties, 24 rear, 26 front? Briefly they were hailed as the future, just as 27.5 and 29 more recently have been, but I guess it never caught on as it looked so odd.

 

[mickle]

Anyone remember the brief trend for 46'ers in the mid nineties, 24 rear, 26 front? Briefly they were hailed as the future, just as 27.5 and 29 more recently have been, but I guess it never caught on as it looked so odd.

I'm about to go it a 27.5 rim to the front of this :

With a fat 26 x 2.5 on the back and a 27.5 x 2.1 both tyres will have the same outside diameter.

 

[Gravity Aided]

Anyone remember the brief trend for 46'ers in the mid nineties, 24 rear, 26 front? Briefly they were hailed as the future, just as 27.5 and 29 more recently have been, but I guess it never caught on as it looked so odd.

I seem to recall having a Cannondale that was like that, I'm unsure of whether it came from the factory that way, but I believe it did. It was a good rider, but too small for me, so I sold it on cheaply after removing all the Deore components. Just like 69'ers, didn't catch on.

 

[MarquisMatsugae]

I seem to recall having a Cannondale that was like that, I'm unsure of whether it came from the factory that way, but I believe it did. It was a good rider, but too small for me, so I sold it on cheaply after removing all the Deore components. Just like 69'ers, didn't catch on.

A 69er ?
Are you watching dodgy movies again ?

 

[Gravity Aided]

Single speed, 26" rear, 29" front. disc brakes.

 

[MarquisMatsugae]

Single speed, 26" rear, 29" front. disc brakes.

It's a very nice looking bike,but I'm not so sure on the combo.
What's the reasoning behind it (in my ignorance)