29 inch wheels are better than 26 inch wheels. The end.
August 22nd, 2006 by Tim GrahlHere’s the story… I’m sick of the debate. Ever since version two of the cyclingnews.com thing came out it’s been a thorn in my mind. The science says it and the ride say it, 29ers are just better cross country bikes for 99% of the people out there.
You can make all the arguments but the facts…
- lower center of gravity
- better traction
- maintains speed
- rolls over obstacles better
- etc etc
…say that riding a mountain bike with 29 inch wheels creates a better ride.
I’m not saying that all 26 inch bike should be replaced. You’ll still see me out on a 26er from time to time. In fact, my next build is gonna be a Surly 1×1. However, if I’m in a situation where I care a lot about speed or traction or riding over obstacles then I’ll be on a 29er.
Some people will argue that they “just don’t like the feel” of a 29er. Well I used to not like wheat bread and soy milk, but ya know… I gave it a try and stuck with it and now I love them and get the benefits. Yes, riding a 29 inch feels different then riding 26 inch. If this surprises you, then you’ve got bigger problems. If you’ve been riding for years and only been on 26 then it obviously will feel different, but give it a longer try then a half hour ride around your street and you’ll realize all of the benefits.
To date I still have never heard someone give a convincing argument against a 29er that has actually ridden one for any extended period of time. The majority of people that argue against them just don’t want to change or give it a try. And that’s fine… just stop the arguing.
So to the manufacturers out there that are a) to scared to enter the market or b) only ‘testing’ the market with a rigid singlespeed… grow a pair and follow the logic. It’s a better ride which means more people are gonna want them. There’s a reason they are selling out everywhere (even the $4400 Orbea Alma)… it’s not a fad, it’s a better bike.
To the debaters out there… stop talking and start riding. You won’t go back.
What is RSS?
Get our articles in your inbox:
The day I am waiting for is when the bike industry finally figures out that anything with two wheels is a bike and they are the bike industry afterall. Same applies to the press and the general public. Not holding my breath though.
I just spent the last two weeks without a car riding my cruiser with a 24″ rear wheel and a 26″ front wheel. Guess what? I got where I wanted to go every time and had fun doing it because I was on a bike, simple as that.
Until it’s tested, recorded, analyzed, reported and reviewed (which is what CN is trying to do) then science hasn’t said anything. Rants and flamewars on blogs and forums are not science. You’re talking about physics, which is valid, but the scientific meathod isn’t a calculation.
-M
Well being 6′3″ and frequently riding in eastern deep woods conditions, I always felt 26′â€?wheels were too small. I know is not PURE science but what would be better off road, a skate board wheel or a monster truck tire? Yeah that’s an exaggeration, but for every pebble that’s capable of stopping your forward movement on a skate board, there is a corresponding bigger one that can stop a bigger wheel. This holds true up to the point where a bigger wheel is just too heavy to spin. But like I said I am a big guy powering a big wheel is not a problem, however over powering a small one is!!! Bigger wheels just make sense for bigger folks!! I mean you can go get a custom bike built for you and everything will be bigger to fit you EXCEPT the wheels???? I have a good friend that’s on the small size, he has a small framed bike, and the 26â€? wheels look huge on that frame. But it works well for him. Now I roll up on my custom bike and the 26â€? wheels look like skate board wheels!! 26â€? wheels are for smaller folks. How ever if you are a smaller person that can power the bigger wheels you will still see some of the same benefits mentioned earlier. Bottom line if you are a bigger person get off the kiddy sized wheels!!
I am a 29er rider, and I have heard all the above arguements..except lower CG, I don’t see how that could be correct. the difference is not enough to hurt handling or climbing or whatever, but still it must be higher. the wheels are bigger, fork taller, frame taller (at the head tube), so cg is a little higher. minor factor.
Hey ! 29′ers are a fad. They’re dead ! Stick a fork in it !
R.
29inch…THE NEW STANDARD…you know it.
bikecop, standard bb heights for say a hardtail in either a 26″ or 29″ wheel bike generally runs in the 11.5 to 12″ range for arguments sake. bb drop is the distance from the center of the axles to the center of the bb. On a 26″ wheel bike that distance is less than that of a 29″ wheel bike by 1.5″es which effectively creates a lower center of gravity on a 29″ wheel bike with no loss of clearances.
The lower c-o-g is double edged however as although it increases stability it also can serve to make a 29″er a bit harder to bunnyhop or manual. But a decent set of skills seems to override that particular shortcoming.
Bunnyhopping, during XC, is something that happens much less often than taking advantage of deeper BB drop of large wheel. Or look at it this way : pedaling and braking are where large wheels work out better.
It’s true that wheels should be proportionate to rider size. But please let now not be said that 29″ is for taller dudes. The 700c standard already rocked when pavement was barely invented or put into practice, and people really didn’t get as tall as today. Today’s S riders would be of “average” height in 1900, but riding 700c fatties nevertheless.
For today’s taller riders, I honestly think 32″ would be a better fit still. XL and XXL riders that have gotten used to 29″ know what I mean, we can handle 29″ just fine, there is no imaginary big gyro force to overcome with iny tiny 10% “larger” wheels. I know for myself, with a properly made 32″, I’ll kick serious butt, and I’m just 180lbs.
To make an honest test of 26″ vs 29″, you need open mindedness, an CN sure seems to have it. Tried on their own to make the fairest test, and when they then got feedback, they adjusted.
All I hope is that James the CN editor will get ij sufficient 29″ miles to fully recognize what he’s dealing with, and how it’s traits need to be scientifically field-tested. If 29″ would be tested to be “slower”, really what they need is a 24″ bike. Or a taller rider
I have good faith in James, I really do. I hope he’ll not be too politically correct about his final findings though
Wheel size becomes apparent after switching from a 20 inch wheel unicycle to my 24inch municycle. All anyone has to do to settle the age old question is ride the bigger wheel when you only have one!
Big wheels rule!
Now all I have to do is sell my 26ers to fund a 29er!!
este
I think you just agreed with me. you said BB height is the same for 26 or 29″ bikes, therefore, CG of the BB/Crank pedals is the same height above the ground between the 2. Seat height above the ground is the same between the 2, but the CGs for everything else, i.e, wheels, head tube, brakes, etc is higher off the ground, therefore,the overall CG is higher off the ground. BB drop doesn’t figure into it really.
actual measurement: hang 29er bike from front wheel, hang vertical string and tape in place. hang from back wheel, repeat. where strings cross is the CG. put bike on flat ground, measure height of string crossing, this is height of CG above ground. Repeat for 26er. 29er will measure out higher off the ground. I gah-ron-tee.
Hey Cloxxki, i hear ya on the 32″ wheel!! That would be cool.. although i wonder if you would have any Toe-over lap? hey bikecop check out this link. http://www.fisherbikes.com/fisher101/index.asp?tech=twoniner
Designing from the ground up, a 32″ bike should fit a 5′11″+ rider, no-comprize in handling or fit deparments.
It’s a matter of money, start-up tooling costs especially. Give me $15-20k, and I make it happen with an awesome 32×2.4″ XC tire, appropriate rims and wider flange hubs. Weight : ~400g more than a similar 29″er. That would ride swell…
Bike Cop,
You are entirely correct when talking about determining the CG of the bicycle itself. But that doesn’t really matter. The rider’s weight is much more than the bike itself. The CoG of the two combined is what matters. And, what you are going to find is that the CoG is in essentially the same place. A *tiny* bit higher on the 29er, barely measureable.
What the original guy was refering to is the BB drop. The 1.5″ greater distance in the vertical plane from the center of the wheels to the BB (where, when standing, the majority of the bike+rider weight is applied) is what (IMO) provides the essence of 29erism. The stable feeling of riding inside the wheels instead of on top of them.
It’s all semantics…
B
1.25″, not 1.5″. Nitpicking, but still…
Without getting too geeky about the real wheels sizes, my math works like this:
29-26 = 3
3/2 = 1.5
Measure a 26″ wheel with exactly 2″ tall tire ==> 26.50″
29″ with 2″ tire ==> 29.0″
It’s true. Please argue me
29ers are great. I used to sell a lot of them at my shop to old people who rode crushed rock trails. Back then we called them hybrids.
They were 28″ers. 29″ tires did not fit. Only very rare trekking bikes pre-’99 ever later happened to fit the WTB Nanoraptor 2.1″, by chance.
They were 29ers if I put enough air in the tires!
Calm down girls, they’re only bicycles. Enjoy them all.
One of the most annoying things about the 29er zealots is that they have decided - usually without much evidence - that 29ers are the be-all, end-all of bikes and pretty much close their minds after that. I heard enough from the local “drank the cooaid” 29er crowd to get curious and picked up an Asylum and have been riding it for 9 months now. It is a great bike. So is my 5 Spot which shares the basic suspension design. The Asylum is nice for some things; the 5 Spot is nice for some things. The Spot (and 26″ wheels) is more rigid and more forgiving handling - much better for gnarly, rooty, rocky, sketchy rides. The Asylum is great on snow, out to cruise and good in more moderate obstacles. The margin for error is bigger with the Spot. If I had to choose I’d keep the 5 Spot. But saying “29ers rule” is just silly - sort of like saying “GS skis are better than powder skis.” If you want to ski powder, use a powder ski; if you want to haul ass use GS skis. But don’t bitch when you sink like a bomb on GS skis . . .
I’m getting tired of that standard zealot rap. Show me some of those zealots please? Those that you are indicating are probably the ones still owning/riding a couple 26″ bikes, or looking at other “weird” bike stuff and non-existent wheel size or considering kinds of riding not commonly known in the bike world.
Looked in a mirror lately? Someone who is willing to argue over a quarter of an inch of bicycle tire could easily be labeled as such by others, and rightly so.
The root of the problem however is perhaps less about the zealotry of those that find 29″ wheels to their liking over their previous love affair with 26″ wheels than the defensiveness of the naysayers which seems to be fueling a constant blaze? As has been said many times over the years. They’re bikes, get on one and ride!
And I’ll take the fat powder skiis please as they can go plenty fast enough for me on the groomers also! In fact I was just manuvering yesterday for a new pair….
Hey lets go all the way with the Zealot stuff, somebody needs to make a 29er FS recumbent mountain bike!!! (joking) I never said they were the best thing since sliced cheese, but for larger dimensioned folks with corresponding larger dimension engines aka (leggs), it makes since to have larger wheels!! You don’t see Hummers the real H1 versions running around with 145/70 series tires mounted on them!!! 26� sized wheels are fine for smaller folks. Big human diesel machines NEED bigger bikes that come with BIGGER wheels!! Would it make since to mount Smaller BMX sized wheels for CC riding? They would be stiffer, they could take one heck of a beating, the bike should be moor nimble, and lighter. But do you think that would make a good CC rig? Heck No…. folks my size would SINK if we hit any sand or endo constantly! Or worst feel like we are going to endo constantly! Also why was 26� decided to be THE defacto tire size? I own a custom built for me FS bike, it’s a great bike I like it, but it was built with the then standard 26� tire size, EVERYTHING else on the bike was made larger to accommodate me, EXCEPT the wheels. So why should HAVE to ride the same size wheels as say somebody that’s 5’5�??? It doesn’t make sense people are different sizes shapes and builds. As was said choice is a great thing. If you don’t like 29ers fine don’t get one, stick to the Kid sized wheels!!! *L* trust me they look kid sized when you ride a custom XLG frame!!!
Pardon my poor spelling!! It should be more not moor… DOH!!!
CG is not lower, this is not true.
BB drop is bigger, and that’s what matter for OTB.
It’s interesting to read this thread and postulate on the many comments about a lower/higher CofG on a 29er. I think that the stability issue that etse mentioned is what’s important. The “cockpit” or riding position on a 29er is more between the wheels than over the wheels and while this may make manoeuverability slightly more difficult it should add to the enjoyment (quality?) of the ride. I have been switching between a normal SS and a 29er SS over the last few weeks and have found the 29er to be more stable and and gentler to ride. On some of the very technical stuff around home, climbing rocky switchbacks with ledges and the like, it has been challenging on the 29er (but that’s fun eh!), but I have found the overall ride has been more enjoyable. Maybe it’s just because it’s new and different, but I don’t think so.
I like Ken’s refrence to the ski industry or skis. Twenty or more years ago the number of powder skis could be counted on one hand. Not that many poeple had them. If you wanted good skis you skied race skis. There wasn’t the 20 genres of skis to choose from there is now. Bicycles are the same way now. Ski & ride what you want. Just have a good time .
This original post is nonesense and just the sort of thing that makes wheel size neutral people like myself annoyed by this endless boring, devisive debate. The post stinks of the sort of sour grapes that don’t result in a tasty beverage. Semi scientific testing up to this point says that the 26″ is an overall better choice. Seat of the pants riding brings mixed reviews where some find the 29er to be the greatest thing ever, others don’t feel it. I personally think 29ers are great and so are 26ers. It is nothing short of mindless instigation to state that “29inch wheels are better than 26 inch wheels. The end.” This is not to say that owning a 29er is a bad choice, if you like it, you like it and you ought to have a great time on your bike. My next bike may very well be a 29er, that does not make it better “the end” it just makes it my choice. Choices are good. So, lets stop declaring one thing better than another and stop worrying about comparisons. I ride Campy on my road bike, I like it, I don’t care if anybody thinks its better or worse than Shimano, THE END.