650 B: You’re Going To Hear A Lot About This- Again: by Guitar Ted.
Now that the cat is out of the bag.
We’ve covered the “Goldilocks” wheel size, better known as 650B, here before at TNI. We even had a website dedicated to the mtb version of the ISO584 tires and bikes for awhile, but it was scuttled after the initial interest in 650B waned and manufacturers let the wheel size sink back into the shadows for awhile. Now, it is poised for not just a return, but to be “the next big thing” in mountain biking.
From SRAM's OE MY2013 Catalog (Image courtesy of anonymous contributor)
We were tipped off to the existence of the above image showing a Rock Shox 650B version of a Revelation model fork back in mid-December from an Australian source. This shows us that the 650B presence in the marketplace is going to be real. Why? Because the tooling and set up to make a fork lower is expensive, and Rock Shox/SRAM isn’t going to produce a fork like this without an OE contractor. Who could that be?
We have had contact with representatives of DT Swiss who told us back in December that they were “getting hammered” about 650B specific wheels from several manufacturers, including a “California based” manufacturer that was going to hit the market with a line of 650B mountain bike products. We were also tipped off by this same DT Swiss source saying that several new tires were also in the works to support this new push for 650B wheels.
Why Now? Here at Twenty Nine Inches, we’ve analyzed the reasons why a 650B mountain bike might be getting a big push from several manufacturers. First, take a look at the model that was chosen for 650B suspension duties. That Revelation model has a travel rating from 130mm to 150mm. This overlaps the maximum travel that we’ve seen 29″ers go to. Many manufacturers are expressing to us the difficulties in making a 29 inch full suspension bike that combines all the attributes of short chain stays, long travel, and triple chain ring capacity with the biggest 2.4″ tires on wide rims. 650B has always been touted as a way to overcome that issue. Next, front ends and stand over issues are another complexity facing designers of longer travel 29″ers. 650B would obviously relax those issues for designers of 5 plus inch travel bikes.
650B will therefore be seen as a way to get your cake and eat it too. Bigger wheels with longer travel with none of the geometry and fit issues that come along with 29 inch wheels. We’re going to hear about this a lot, and soon we’ll be seeing these products and bikes appear. Our bet is that Sea Otter will be quite interesting this year.
While we suspect some 650B hard tails will also come along in the coat tails of this new push for 650B, we’re betting it will be slotted into the longer travel applications where 29″er wheels are proving to be a difficult sell to the core market users of long travel and where the designers of full suspension for those folks don’t feel 29 inch wheels work.
Stay tuned for further developments on this story.
For more on the rumors and news about this development, click the link at the top of this post in the first line which will take you to “Mountain Bike” where we saw the story break first.
This is a good thing. I have ridden 29″ for a long time, and nowadays seeing a mountain bike with 26″ wheels makes me wonder how we ever managed to get by with those tiny wheels.
The problem these days is the smaller frames with 29″ wheels on them look all wrong, geometry-wise. Not having ever ridden a small or medium frame I cannot say that these are as goofy to handle as they look.
650b is a perfect in-between for larger rolling on a smaller frame, and I hope that it finally takes off.
Neat comparison pic here: http://gearinches.com/blog/internet-goodies/650b-tire-diameter
This should be interesting.
The way I see it, 29ers earned their position on the market mostly because riders asked for them, some manufacturers were never, and still aren’t crazy about them.
With 650B, it’s the other way around, they are basically being showed down our throats and people usually don’t respond well to that.
For some companies this is going to be a huge gamble (Turner comes to mind) if it turns out that saying “3rd time is the charm” won’t work with 650B.
Ojos, that is my view too.
29ers were picked up by the big manufacturers, once they realized they were not going away. Sure, there is some 650b demand, but little to none in the big travel niche!
Why now? GT, you point out a lot of technical arguments, but those count for 26″ too, right? less wheel size = more space for travel and linkages. Why change?
My simple take is this: The bike manufacturer branche got some big sales figures out of the very powerful ‘next big thing’ marketing hype that is based on bigger wheels. They are simply applying the same strategy to the ‘more-travel’ crowd. It’s a risk though: A big enough number of big manufacturers has to do it, otherwise the customer will not get the idea that this is really the revolution they should be part of.
Offcourse, every mountainbike innovation is driven by marketing, but this one more than anything else.
@Ojos Azules, @JeroenK Astute observations on your parts. I also see those things you have mentioned as being major differences in 650B’s rise vs 29″ers. One being more organic the other a bit more contrived.
That said, this seems to sound as if there is a bit more “horsepower” behind it. The core users of longer travel AM/FR/DH rigs will vote with their dollars and in the end, we’ll see what happens. My belief is that that if this doesn’t plant 650B on the map, it never will happen.
Its about time the industry got their heads out of their arse’s!. I’ve been running 650′s for 2 years now and it FUN!! I still prefere to run 29′s but I run differn’t combo’s. Some times I run a 29 front with a 650 rear. or 650 front and a 26 rear.They both respond great. Maybe the big wig’s will start making 650b tires more affordable also. Pacenti and IRD’s are the best out there for the money. I still will not run a 650b fork. I run Pace rc31 forks. They fit every size.
So which manufacturer is it?
I´ve read a couple of times, that it is a company from California, the name starts with an S – but it isn´t Specialized.
Santa Cruz??? Scott!?
@Znarf- I have no insider info, but in CA, starts with S, and has been pushing DT for product? That sounds like Specialized. They’ve used a lot of DT rims (including getting the first specific 29er rim from DT oem) and DT based hub internals.
Also Scott is out of UT.
Either way I’m really curious to see who it is.
I completed a build on a fully rigid 650B hardtail mountain bike a couple of weeks ago. I like it a lot. I also have a fully rigid 2X10 geared 29′er that I also like a lot. Both wheel sizes have a lot to offer. My wife rode my new 650B last week and she thinks it is better suited for her. She feels it accelerates a little faster and seems to turn faster than her hardtail 29′er which she has been riding a couple of years. She commented that she thinks the 650B will be a good match for women racers. I think she may have something there. Looks like I may be building her a 650B some time soon. We both hope that major bike and component companies add 650B bikes and components to their inventory in upcoming months/years. One real need at this time is more tire selections. Pacenti 650B’s are good but a semi-slick and bigger volume tire would be nice.
So does this mean that you will change this website’s name?
@Yogi: That would be a “No”. That doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be another website though.
I don’t really care for the 650B standard.
On technical detail strike me though: 32mm stanchions on a 150mm 650B fork seems kind of skinny, especially with the intended use in mind?
More sizes, more standards, more fencew sitting.. Please! No 650b. The difference between 26 and 29 is minor (5 -10%). Even less so for 650b.
It does seem like an opportunity to just sell more stuff and further confuse those entering our sport.
After a little digging, ruling out some companies… It is GIANT that will be making the push. It seems like the 26″ market has taken a big hit with all the 29′r FS…
I would like to see the 650B replace the 26″ inch wheel all together in the 5 to 7″ travel range.
To me the 650B makes a lot of sense for 29er bikes over 120mm of travel. It is my opinion, that you do not need more than 120mm of travel on an 29er. After that, bring on the 650B for the 5 to 7″ travel bikes.
A long travel 29er has long been my dream bike but could never build nor get one.
So last year I decided to mount 650B wheels with Nevegals 2,1(from a KHS 606 650B) to my decomissioned full suspension frame Marin Wolf Ridge 2004 (adjustable travel from 4 – 6 inches)combined with the Manitou Nixon 2006 or so (adjustable travel from 0 – 150 mm – no issue with 650B wheel). And it works just perfectly!!! I can confirm that this platform is perfectly working and hope to see more of these bikes in the future, not only the ones from KHS…. hope Marin will get my message
Photo is available upon request via e-mail.
Best to you!
Michal, Slovakia, Europe
Yeah, 650b definitely needs to happen. I’ve been in the bike biz for longer than I care to admit and I definitely believe the need for this wheel standard has been there since day 1. For anyone who understands simple physics, the benefits of larger wheels have always been pretty damn obvious. However, if 29′ers have shown us anything, it’s that there is such a thing as “too big” for some applications.
Long-travel suspension is one of those. Fitting smaller riders is another.
I’ve put enough small riders (5′ to 5’5″) on 29-er test rides to hear the same complaints over and over. The more experienced ones say the bike steers like a bus, the novices mostly notice that they can’t lift the front wheel, and everybody complains about the weight, particularly at the entry level.
Being a 5’8″ rider myself, I understand what they mean and I’ve experienced similar drawbacks since switching to 29″ hardtails. The benefits (for me) make the negatives worth tolerating, but just barely.
The beauty of the 650b wheel is that it gives you much of the benefit of 29″ wheels (lower rolling resistance, greater traction, stability, momentum), but almost none of the negatives (weight gain, longer wheel base, goofy geometry for small riders, travel limitations).
I have no doubt that 650b will be the gold standard as a big wheel for small riders and it will probably take over full suspension entirely. At least I’d like it to.
Hell, if Gary Fisher had been 5’9″, we’d be riding 650b’s already.
Interesting. “For anyone who understands simple physics” and “650b gives you much of the benefit of 29″ wheels)” occurring in the same post.
Much of the benefit of 29″ wheels was placebo to start with. You can’t just consider the relative size, you have to consider the relative angle of attack AT THE POINT OF CONTACT.
For 90% of terrain features, the difference in angle of contact between 26 and 29 is less than 0.1% The difference rises to around 1-2% when passing through stream beds and babyheads, but this is not usually a large portion of any course.
But 650B is significantly closer to 26 than 29. The effective differences would be less than 1/3 those experienced comparing 26 and 29.
I’m not saying there’s no benefit to a larger diameter. Clearly there is, but it’s much more dependent on mindset than on physics.
The only reason 29 and 650b are being discussed currently is that they are critical to keep the supply chain moving since the MTB market stalled 4-5 years ago.
How do I know? I’ve worked in the bicycle industry in Asia for 5 years and I know a good number of the folks behind these moves in places like California, Utah and the North Shore.
And I have a fairly decent grasp of simple physics.
Oh and incidentally, if you want to know where the increased rollability comes from if it doesn’t come from the geometry…
The vast majority of it comes from the simple increase in rotational mass. That will have a FAR greater effect than the size.
But you can increase it just as easily without changing the wheel size.
Increasing rotational mass will allow the bike to plough through and over obstacles more easily as well as contribute to gyroscopic forces to give the bike a more stable feeling.
You will lose all of it at low speeds and in technical areas, where a larger wheel will be harder to manoeuver.
On the trails I am used to (ie north shore), technical areas are more common than high speed areas, so I prefer to stick with 26… but with a more robust tire up front.