Cycling News testing out more 29 inch bikes
June 8th, 2006 by Tim GrahlCyclingNews.com posted a new article in their 29er series. They’ve had two bikes built by Seven Cycles. One with 26 inch wheels and the other with 29 inch wheels. Everything else is as identical as possible.
Two-niner this, 29-inch that… what’s the deal with those big wheels, anyway? Once dismissed as a passing fad, the 29-inch-wheel “revolution” has taken a firm hold on the mountain bike world. Even the geometrically challenged can see that the wheels are substantially bigger than the 26-inch standard, but what exactly is it about these giant hoops that has everyone all up in arms? James Huang takes an in-depth look at the issue through an engineering lens to figure it out once and for all in Part One of this two-part feature.
…
We worked closely with the specialists at Seven Cycles to obtain a pair of Seven’s premier carbon and titanium IMX hardtail frames. Seven’s unique talents were tapped to normalize the ride qualities of the two frames by varying the titanium tubing stock as well as the carbon fiber layups, and the handling characteristics were matched as closely as possible.
Their goal is to test them and figure out which is better. Of course we all know what’s better but some people have to be hit over the head with it.
What is RSS?
Get our articles in your inbox:
There are several glaring problems with this whole thing starting with the statement “James Huang takes an in-depth look at the issue through an engineering lens to figure it out once and for all….” Gee James, thanks for figuring that out for me. I’m sure it’ll work out just right for my riding style on my terrain…….pffft!
Then there are the variables of human input, which aren’t addressed at all. Hrrumpph!
Have you taken a look at that head angle, trail figure, gearing, and chainstay length? How about those super flexy Bonty hoops they are running on the 29″er? Riiiigggght!
And he’s using heart rate and no power output data? …….snort!
Engineering lens? Better bust out the lens cleaner, James, things are looking rather murky already!
Running identical angles and measurements is a huge mistake, and a total waste of a perfectly good custom high end frame IMHO.
As for the bike feeling sluggish, he should probably borrow my One 9.
Hopefully James will put enough time in on the 29′er to acclimate to it’s ride characteristics. From my experience it takes at least a few weeks of solid riding to become proficient on the big wheels. He sounds as if he’s coming into this a bit jaded and is clearly going to feel much more at home on the 26 inch bike. I’m excited to hear his final test results, but i won’t be surprised if he poos on the 29′er a bit. We’ll keep riding ours though, more efficient or not their simply more fun to ride.
I find itr very entertaining that some folks are investing so much time and energy into this. Methinks that the industry is now seeing how much money could be made from 29ers, and is looking for a semi-scientific analysis to tout?
I agree though, that James’ review will likely snub the 29er as a performance-oriented machine. Maybe liken it to a big European car: Not fast off the line, but handles like it’s on rails and takes corners with authority!
I still don’t see that facts to back that up, but if my bike would indeed end up being proved slower to accelerate, I’ll gladly take that, as on my favorite super-twisty track, I still feel at a huge advantage. I can stay off the brakes AND off the pedals, but give 26″ers a really hard time to stay on my wheel. It’s like cheating, but fair, and my competition is sure my bike sucks, and won’t even give it a real go.