Certainly Gary Fisher is to be thanked for propelling the idea forwards a little faster than it might have gone, but to say it would have been nothing but an anecdote is not really very realistic, in my opinion.

IF NO MAJOR BIKE MANUFACTURER PUSHES 27.5 IT WILL GO NOWHERE AND SINCE GIANT, SPECIALIZED, TREK FISHER ETC ARE NOT BUILDING 27.5’s THERE WILL BE NO SUSPENSION FORKS, THERE WILL BE VERY FEW TIRES, THERE WILL BE VERY FEW WHEELS AND MOST BIKE SHOPS WILL CARRY NO PARTS AND NO MATTER HOW GOOD IT IS, IT WILL DRY UP AND GO AWAY.

If it were not for fisher where would 29ers be?

So, how bout we save the 27.5 conversation for sometime in the future if or when it becomes relevant? I have nothing against the idea of a 27.5 wheel, it is just that I am as likely to see one in person in the next year as I am Bigfoot or the Lock Ness Monster.

It is odd to me that the cover story for the last few days on TWENTYNINEINCHES.COM has been about a wheel size that likely exists on fewer than ten bikes on the planet. Meanwhile I have to surf other mtn bike sites to find out what is currently happening in the 29er world.

Vic

29ers have an advantage over 26ers in rollover and maintaining momentum. They are now in common availability. However, they’re not in UNIVERSAL availability (Giant, Santa Cruz, others). Until they are, any new wheel size will come at the expense of 29ers as opposed to 26ers as 26er are the established universal norm.

27.5 Tires … They’ll come at the expense of 29er tires
27.5 Forks … Even worse, every 27.5 fork means a 29er fork model that will not appear.
27.5 Rims … As far as MTBs go, they’ll only steal thunder from a VERY limited selection of 29er rims.

My guess is that the industry will by and large simply ignore 650b. They will rightly conclude that there are already enough issues to deal with when supporting both 26er and 29er product lines.

BTW, all this goes for 32ers and 36ers as well. After 29ers replace the cross country segment of the market, it will be time to start talking about a new wheel standard.

bloody tongue: I don’t know anybody that’s not biased. The notion that someone is totally unbiased is naive. That said, you could have just said I am full of B.S. and saved yourself a ton of keystrokes.

oolong & jb: Seems like you two have a handle on this. Enjoy your next bike rides……on whatever bikes you choose!

cyclist: I believe that there are already plenty of examples of full suspension 29″ers that are garnering rave reviews. Some even are being ridden by folks in the 5′4″-5′7″ range, (Lenz Leviathan for one) I am not discounting your ideas for a 27fiver FS bike, I’m just saying that the 29″er FS is alive and well. Not a problem really.

If in fact 27five answers a lot of these problems in a better way, then yes, perhaps one day the industry at large will adopt the wheel size as a widely used “standard”. Until then, the jury is still out. Lots of folks will be riding 27five to find out for themselves just what is going on with the format. I look forward to their reports and hopefully I’ll be able to add my own soon.

now there seems to be the other question of how the big companies are all struggling with the idea of how to make a Full Suspension 29′er that does not 1)weigh to much, 2) have wheel base issues once you add the 100 - 120mm travel forks 3) standover issues because of an even taller front end….. now do you really think these companies are going to ingnore the option of 27.5″ if it is the answer to these said problems? i think not.

open your eyes.

The important thing is transparency. I think it’s clear on a site named “Twentynineinches.com” where everyone’s coming from. If you don’t value the opinions of a reviewer approaching a product test from this viewpoint, then there are plenty of other websites to visit with reviewers who tackle product reviews from different perspectives.

As one who rides a 29er, I would find a review of a 27.5 bike from a fellow 29er rider FAR more valuable than a 27.5 review written by a rider of 26’s…