29

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Cyclist33

Guest
Location
Warrington
"The rise in popularity of short travel suspension based, 700c hybrids, and the increased appreciation of cyclocross bikes, was largely responsible for the recent trend of 29er mountain bikes."

Discuss.
 

lulubel

Über Member
Location
Malaga, Spain
Was it? Does it matter?
 

lulubel

Über Member
Location
Malaga, Spain
Maybe you're confusing me with someone else, since I don't usually post a few words like that, but that was the first thing that came to mind, so ....

You appeared to want a discussion, but you hadn't really provided any material to trigger discussion, so I thought I'd ask a couple of questions that might get things moving.

But since you've set me to ignore (and I honestly have no idea what I've done to offend you), you won't see this post, will you?
 

Drago

Legendary Member
Gary Fisher and To a lesser extent Spesh are really responsible for hammering away at it until the market slowly responded. The whole idea for 29" MTVs goes back to the 70s and Geoff Apps and the Cleland and Highpath brands. He got Gary Fisher interested but the couldn't get a reliable supply of 29" off road tyres in the 70s so mass production was impossible. If course, all this pre dates hybrids and HTs by a very good number of years.

I think a 29 HT for fair condition trail riding is next on my list, but ill need to spend £800+ to get sonething properly useable with wheels that don't flex. Ill keep my 26'ers for wetter, muckier rides, with their smaller wheels so much less probe to clagging and weighing less when they do. Conversely, the drier climate of the SW United States is where the 29 comes into its own, and as tyre supply ever so slowly increased Fisher, and later Spesh were able to offer the production concept that Fisher had dearly wanted to in the 70's, but couldn't. Ultimately we have Geoff Apps to thank for all this, and arguably for making the first dedicated MTB, as opposed to jazzing up a beach cruiser frame as the Yanks were doing at the time.

But in a nutshell, your assertion was wrong. 29" wheeled MTBs go back 40 years to Apps, and had the tyres been available then it would all be very old news.

If course, 650B is an even older standard and on paper it looks like the one that might finally supersede the 26 in muddier climates. Ridden plenty of 29s and really would like to try a 650B (or a 27 as they're now being called) to see if they really do hit that sweet spit with some of the advantages and less of the draw backs. We'll see.
 

Cubist

Still wavin'
Location
Ovver 'thill
I can see the 29 advantage over XC style riding, British bridleway style stuff, and Germanic fire road touring, but I'm really struggling to see why 650B has much of an advantage over 26. With an inch and a half diameter difference can we really be expected to ditch all the established 26 componentry? My feelings are that for market exploitation a lot of 26 stuff will fit on a 650B bike, and the makers can claim cutting edge and progress without having to amend their processes root and branch, but it has a real whiff of "emporer's new clothes" about it all. I can imagine quite a pricing premium for the "new standard" in tyres and tubes, rims and wheelsets, for precious little real advantage,.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
I think a lot of the trades excitement over 650 is cost for the most part they can use existing forks, or maybe in a bit cynical. I'm going to try and blah one to try, but it'll deffo be the 650 version of one I've ridden as a 26 otherwise its a bit of a moot comparison.
 

Cubist

Still wavin'
Location
Ovver 'thill
I think a lot of the trades excitement over 650 is cost for the most part they can use existing forks, or maybe in a bit cynical. I'm going to try and blah one to try, but it'll deffo be the 650 version of one I've ridden as a 26 otherwise its a bit of a moot comparison.
That's my point, they can claim they are moving on with wheel sizes without having to source new forks etc etc. Given that the industry, until about a year and a half ago, was utterly saturated with 26 inch technology, the only advantage of 650B is to refresh market interest via the "obsolete" 26 argument, and they can do this without the associated costs of regearing themselves to 29 production.

To keep selling bikes, especially to people who already have bikes, you need a novelty concept. They've done suspension, and much more advance over current air shock technology is fearsomely expensive, which won't sell to the mass market. They've done frame materials, but you can't get lighter than race spec alu or carbon, so the mass market won't be sold on anything else.

I can sort of imagine a "steel" revolution, but as your average Joe checks the quality of a bike by feeling its weight, steel will only really sell to the cognoscenti.

So that leaves wheel size.

I can kinda buy into 29, but I'm desperately cynical about 650B.
 

lulubel

Über Member
Location
Malaga, Spain
I can kinda buy into 29, but I'm desperately cynical about 650B.

I read an article by someone who put a 650B wheel on the front of a 26in to improve his race performance. (As usual I'm totally useless and can't find it again.) It would be a fun experiment to see if it makes the front wheel track any better over rocks, but too expensive for me because he had to change his RS forks for Fox to get the bigger wheel to fit.

The bike looked fascinatingly odd.
 
Top Bottom