Retrobike
http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/

OMG 650b is tiny!
http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=395433
Page 2 of 2

Author:  davidj [ Tue May 14, 2019 1:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

First ride out on the new 29er with a large frame. Looks great, needs a longer stem and then upgrades all round to make it mine.

Am I mad or do 29er's roll faster than 650b? I had to take my 650b to remote storage (too many bikes for the space at home!) Even downhill it felt slower than both the 29er's. No brake rub, wheels spin freely????

Attachments:
Webp.net-resizeimage.jpg
Webp.net-resizeimage.jpg [ 394.18 KiB | Viewed 293 times ]

Author:  mattr [ Tue May 14, 2019 1:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: OMG 650b is tiny!

29ers roll faster. (Given same tyre model/size/pressure/etc)

Author:  davidj [ Thu May 16, 2019 8:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

My previous (medium) Sky Blue 29er is now broken up and ready for sale. The Hope Hoops have made it over to the new to me (large) Moonstone Grey 29er. Massive weight difference on the rear wheel, at this point I don't know if it is tyres, wheels, cassette or a combination of them all.

I already have moved my Brooks Cambium, DMR v12 and my favourite grips over.

Attachments:
Webp.net-resizeimage (1).jpg
Webp.net-resizeimage (1).jpg [ 475.32 KiB | Viewed 256 times ]

Author:  davidj [ Thu May 16, 2019 8:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re:

I was contemplating keeping the Race Face finishing kit as the stem & bars are 35mm. On reflection I am going to move over my Thomson kit as the 35mm knuckle looks disproportionate against the 32mm Reba stanchions.

Aesthetics are as important as performance, aren't they?

Attachments:
Webp.net-resizeimage (2).jpg
Webp.net-resizeimage (2).jpg [ 504.23 KiB | Viewed 253 times ]

Author:  Duxuk [ Fri May 17, 2019 8:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: OMG 650b is tiny!

I disagree that aesthetics are as important as performance. My classic Whyte JW4 is modernised with wide bars and short stem but retains it's low rolling resistance from 26" wheels. With 3X10 transmission it's a better climber than my 650b bike. I do find the 27.5" tyres give more cushioning and grip but if I was buying new I'd certainly go for a 29er. They roll over rocky terrain far better. On smooth ground you wouldn't notice but in my area I'd fancy narrower 29" tyres.
I've just read this months MBR and a letter writer says that he's faster almost everywhere on narrow tyres than he was on the OE 2.8"ers. Most of the industry seems to be going the wrong way. Bring back the old school, for me. Your bikes all look very good. Clean, unlike my own.
Image

Author:  mattr [ Fri May 17, 2019 11:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: OMG 650b is tiny!

Duxuk wrote:
retains it's low rolling resistance from 26" wheels.
??

All the research shows 29er has lower rolling resistance. (Given same tyre model and pressures.)

Author:  Duxuk [ Fri May 17, 2019 8:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: OMG 650b is tiny!

mattr wrote:

All the research shows 29er has lower rolling resistance. (Given same tyre model and pressures.)

The thing is if I used the same tyre pressures on my 27.5" and 26" wheels, they'd probably roll the same. But old school 26ers tend to run 10psi higher. I know you don't have to but the fact is that this is what we do. If I'd used under 30 psi today on my Whyte I could easily have pinched the tubed tyre. Got a thrilling tail slide on a big berm today. I probably needed less pressure! It's horses for courses.

Author:  mattr [ Sat May 18, 2019 10:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: OMG 650b is tiny!

Erm. Higher pressure off road = more rolling resistance.

Especially if you're on the sort of terrain that is pinch puncture territory.

(I run my 26er at 25 or less and have no issues, even when racing, and it's all rocks and roots round here. (Unfortunately, I'm not light either.)

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/