Retrobike OG's favourite type of thread no doubt^I started one of those once...
Retrobike OG's favourite type of thread no doubt^I started one of those once...
Having ridden both 29" and 26" in some anger in an xc setting......i know which one my shed is full of......and its not 29"Only in touring has 26" still got value.
Why not a motor?if you can't be bothered to even pedal during a race, why not take the crank, chain, cassette, shifters etc off too and replace them with a carbon foot rest!
I think we may have invented something hereWhy not a motor?
I was expecting some rebuttall. If you prefer 26, go for it. I never did. Very nimble but the wheels just don't carry any speed.Having ridden both 29" and 26" in some anger in an xc setting......i know which one my shed is full of......and its not 29"
Down hill, why not, but then if you can't be bothered to even pedal during a race, why not take the crank, chain, cassette, shifters etc off too and replace them with a carbon foot rest! Think of the weight saving.
No jumps but more gravel in the big tours.They carry speed due to their weight...
But its horses for courses and even xc races now have down hill bits, coz apparently its boring to the x games generation otherwise.
Im suprised the Tour de France doesn't have jumps or a mandatory quarterpipe in in now.
I am saying that the fact a wheel like I mentioned carries more speed, so it is not just weight, also size. It will be even more for a 29 er28 or 29.....29" xc with a 2.3" on it will be somewhat different from a 28" with 23mm on.
Now your comparing apples to oranges.