What's the point

[tintin40]

of 29r size frame/wheels for mtb's? The industry should be standardizing kit. Roadies have the big wheels, Mtb'ers have 26'' What's wrong with that??

 

[Elev12k]

It is not in the industry's interest to sell you only 1 or 2 bikes. No, rather 5. For about every possible purpose you can think of one. Moreover they like to innovate, if it was for only making you think you can't do with your old bike and you need new.

 

[orange71]

would we have had mountain bikes if somebody hadn't thought - I know let's stick fat tyres on this bike and go off road? Others at the time might have said - "it'll never catch on!"

 

[pete_mcc]

Seems to me that it's a big West Coast States thing and not really anywhere else (except now some of the idiot uber niche groups on STW), I can understand why it works there where they have long large open roads with limited twisty turny singletrack so quick acceleration isn't an issue, but in the rest of the worls it just won't work. There was also an arguement that it was a case of the americans are trying to recapture the sport from the europeans and 'new worlders' now that we are all winning everything and doing it a touch better than them and hence they 'reinvent the wheel'.

 

[orange71]

Is there an argument that 29" wheels would suit the taller among us better than 26"? I mean a 26" to me might be like a 24" to an average person so a 29" might be better.

 

[Russell]

I dunno, I understand the science behind 29'ers, they do roll better over the lumps and bumps making them faster and more comfortable. For an off-roader that rides lots of swoopy bridleways and tracks they make perfect sense.

And stick a set of slicks on your 29er and you have a better road bike than your old 26" rig Quite versatile really.

 

[Stick Legs]

Agree with the R man.

Having tried one out I would have one if I was only allowed one bike. However, having 3 1/2 I don't need one.

Like the way they look though, 26" in larger frame sizes look a bit GATE. 29'ers make all of us look like we are on 16" steel Kona's

 

[Elev12k]

Actually I am not strictly against 29ers. My previous post was more a general statement. Have seen many innovations more useless than 29ers the last 15 yrs or so. 29 wheels suit tall blokes better, if it was only for the eye. Understand bigger wheels roll smoother. Never rode one, but someone who ownes one said the difference is not significant. I think with many innovations the industry, mags would like you think you will be in some kind of bicycle heaven. All problems will be solved and you are a happier person on the trails. I don't think it is true. It is different, with advantages and disadvantages. Same for Rohloff hubs and Ti frames for example ...not to mention discs and suspension. Specificly on the 29: Maybe 29 front and 26 rear would be ideal equilibrium.

 

[Russell]

Ooooh, different size wheels front and rear Cannondale (amongst others) tried that with a mix of 26" and 24" and gave it up as a lost cause. Maybe its time to try again with 29" and 26"?

I think that the problem the industry has at the moment is that the MTB in general has pretty much reached its pinnacle. We now have lightweight, full suspension bikes with gears that work pretty much all the time and brakes that stop us whenever we want. Where does it go now? The industry has to innovate... or die, to quote one of the main players

 

[Stick Legs]

29" front 26" rear is what Steve Worland is riding on his DeKerf single speed right now, with RC31's too.

A bit self conciously 'niche' for my tastes though, you know, how odd can you get!!