# 26 or 29inch



## Egon Belmontie (3 Jul 2014)

Hi all 

Just a quick question i was just wondering if there is much difference in the 2 sizes?

Is there a real benefit to ether or is it a personal preferences thing?

Just curious as after the back end of my bike was totalled by a car i need to look into getting a replacement bike and the 29s seem to come up quite a bit.

Thanks.


----------



## Kestevan (3 Jul 2014)

Don't really see the point of 29" bikes for most people, Unless you're freakishly tall there's nowt wrong with 26" wheels for off road use.

I suspect that the recent push for 29" bikes is largely driven by the marketing bods wanting to have something new and flashy to sell.


----------



## Crackle (3 Jul 2014)

I don't know what you are looking at or your budget but you might find 26" bikes are simply not in the range any more. It's 650b or 29. As for the merits of each, they can probably be debated until the cows come home, go back out, come back home again..... In general terms, the usual advice applies, pick something which suits the riding you do and the kind of rider you are. 

Is there a benefit to 29ers, yes, the angle of incidence of wheel to bump is less, so 29ers feel smoother, the bigger wheel has more inertia so they roll well. Are there any disadvantages, yes, not all frames and manufacturers are equal so the sizing is sometimes odd compared to a 26. Bigger wheels require a longer wheelbase so it's said 29ers aren't as nimble. So again, it comes back to what your intended use is and how you ride.


----------



## Egon Belmontie (3 Jul 2014)

Ok cool thanks for that, I think i'll stick to what im used to then, just thought id ask as i couldn't see much in it and im only 5.8 so 26s is perfect for my commuting and light week end off roading then, 

Cheers guys.


----------



## gazguildford (5 Jul 2014)

I have only recently started cycling again (since I was a kid) I always had 26 but this time I opted for 29" I'm only 5'6 I find the 29 great maybe it's all in my head after reading 29s roll over stumps and obstacles better, if it's in my head then it's not a bad thing because I have an added (maybe false) sense of confidence in the bike.


----------



## Crackle (5 Jul 2014)

gazguildford said:


> I have only recently started cycling again (since I was a kid) I always had 26 but this time I opted for 29" I'm only 5'6 I find the 29 great maybe it's all in my head after reading 29s roll over stumps and obstacles better, if it's in my head then it's not a bad thing because I have an added (maybe false) sense of confidence in the bike.


Out of interest, what bike have you got?


----------



## gazguildford (5 Jul 2014)

A specialized rockhopper 29er 2014 had it for a few months and at first I thought "trails and off road only" because there are some nutters on the road! But I use it for both now and with the potholes ound here it was worth it lol!


----------



## Milzy (5 Jul 2014)

It is all about the 27.5. 29s nice for big obstacles but are slower to spin up.


----------



## mobi (7 Jul 2014)

If you ever need to carry your bike inside a medium size hatchback, 29 may be a problem. 26 fits fine in most cars without taking out front wheel.


----------



## Archeress (7 Jul 2014)

I have a GT Timberline 29er. It has all terrain tyres on it. I have used it on MTB rides with my club and found it to handle really nicely, probably is a little less maneuverable than a 26", but handles obstacles better. I have also commuted on it, and it is not hard to get it up to 25mph on the flat (as long as I put more air in the tyres). It is probably a bit heavier than a 26", after all there are longer forks, chain stays and seat stays.

Hugs
Archeress x


----------



## stinaV8 (7 Jul 2014)

It's a personal thing , depending what type of riding you do. I like the 650b size , Good compromise between roll over , handling and acceleration . My husband has a late 90's cannondale jeykle 26" he loves that , it's quite twitchy , but fun . He's a bit shorter than me and it suits him well , Earlier this year he bought a diamond back 29er , he never really bonded with it as an MTB , we stuck it on road tyres and he loves it as a hybrid , ( he did a 67 mile heart foundation ride on it ) 
See if you can test ride a few sizes .


----------



## Saluki (7 Jul 2014)

@ScotiaLass will be along in a min to extol the virtues of a 29er. From what she has been saying about hers, I'm quite tempted myself.


----------



## ScotiaLass (7 Jul 2014)

Saluki said:


> @ScotiaLass will be along in a min to extol the virtues of a 29er. From what she has been saying about hers, I'm quite tempted myself.


I'm here! 

I know some will disagree and say it's a gimmick, but personally, I love my 29er!
It rolls very easily, handles better than I thought it would for the size, and as @Archeress says, it may be a little less agile than a 26 but it more than makes up for it by coping with everything I've put in front of it so far!
I took mine on holiday to Morayshire and rode it around the local woods and had an absolute blast (until rider error landed me on the floor, where I lay laughing!). It coped with the woods, river trails and the road, all with ease.


----------



## gelfy666 (7 Jul 2014)

since buying my Saracen Kili 29er ive grown to love it now.... probably because it was a 2013 and 1/2 price,... but yes it does what i want it to do, and being 6' 3" i dont look to bad on it.


----------



## Bodhbh (7 Jul 2014)

Kestevan said:


> Don't really see the point of 29" bikes for most people, Unless you're freakishly tall there's nowt wrong with 26" wheels for off road use.
> 
> I suspect that the recent push for 29" bikes is largely driven by the marketing bods wanting to have something new and flashy to sell.



Well considering how much noodling and min/maxing gets done about every single - probably irrelavent - feature on a bike, it's seems pretty legit that something as fundamental as wheel size gets a bit of a attention when making a purchase


----------



## wiggydiggy (7 Jul 2014)

Genesis Mantle 20 myself, love it


----------



## Hacienda71 (7 Jul 2014)

I would be interested to hear if anyone has hammered both a 26 and 29 on some proper technical rough stuff. We hear the same arguments but it is normally hearsay rather than real life experience. I road ride a lot more than mtb but ride a Spesh Stumpjumper Expert 26er despite being 6'4ish and have always found it poised and quick to react both on rough trails in the Pennines and on purpose built trailcentres.


----------



## marzjennings (7 Jul 2014)

I've ridden both 26" and 29" and still do. Keeping one of each depending on the ride I plan. Mostly I ride the 29er as for 90% of the trails around here it's faster, simple. Carries speed better through corners, over lumps and bumps and uphills. The 26" wins when the trails get too twitchy and twisty or riding technical downhill.


----------



## Learnincurve (7 Jul 2014)

I think it's all down to the individual, the riding style and the terrain. I used to do a lot of riding on the technical rough stuff using my old school hardtail with 26 inch wheels, and I went out on the hardtail 700c with MTB wheels on it for the first time in years and years the other day and I was fighting the bike and not the hills. "oh god, _why are you doing that_" was the theme of the day. I'm absolutely sure it was the larger wheel size, it's hard to describe but it felt like the steering was disconnected from the ground. It's not the first time this happened either, it felt like that on grass/light mud with the hybrid tyres on, but on the other side of the coin it loves gravel no matter what tires you have. 

in conclusion. I'm not convinced by 29ers at all for heavy off road use, but I absolutely can see their virtue for lighter off road stuff gravel/old train lines/packed earth


----------



## Scotchlovingcylist (8 Jul 2014)

My commute is 11 miles each way, 90% road. I also like the occasional blast on the trails when I get chance, coupled with the fact I only have the funds and storage for one bike I find the 29er to be a nice comprimise. 
As @Archeress says it is really easy to wind up to speed and feels nice and stable when you get there. Also im 6'1" and 17st so I like the fact its built like a tank, takes the abuse of potholes and curbs on the road and rolls over just about everything on the trails.


----------



## jack smith (8 Jul 2014)

Go with what your comftorable with, if i got a mtb id personnalu go 29 but even my s works venge has been on a full on woods mtb track (by accident i took the wrong turn) the breaks couldnt stop it so i just carried on and it seemed to fair okay on 23mm tyres at 120 psi lol so for commuting it will be fine, but tbh i dont see why your not going with a hybrid


----------



## jowwy (8 Jul 2014)

Ive got a jammis dekota 29er thats never seen a mountain or a trail centre. The suspension forks havd been removed and replaced with carbon forks, tyres are 28mm conti 4 seasons. Its got a seatpost rack, full hydraulic disc brakes and is awesome on my mix of canal towpath and cycle path commute. I loves it. Ive even put on origin8 drop bar extensions on it, so i can get lower into the wind...........so its now virtually a drop bar/flat bar cx bike


----------



## Learnincurve (8 Jul 2014)

jack smith said:


> but tbh i dont see why your not going with a hybrid



The kind of hybrid you are talking about is basically a hard tail mountain bike with thinner 700c wheels rather than the 29er mtb wheels. They are a bit of a marketing scam if I'm honest. Hard tails are cheap to make and since the invention of suspension mountain bikers are not that interested in hard tail any more. They are also very heavy, in some instances even in comparison to a mountain bike with front suspension. I like my hybrid, it's great for mixed stuff like road and towpath, but I'll not take it off road again, partly because of how skittish it was, partly because front suspension exists now and I'm not that nostalgic.


----------



## Archeress (8 Jul 2014)

Learnincurve said:


> The kind of hybrid you are talking about is basically a hard tail mountain bike with thinner 700c wheels rather than the 29er mtb wheels. They are a bit of a marketing scam if I'm honest. Hard tails are cheap to make and since the invention of suspension mountain bikers are not that interested in hard tail any more. They are also very heavy, in some instances even in comparison to a mountain bike with front suspension. I like my hybrid, it's great for mixed stuff like road and towpath, but I'll not take it off road again, partly because of how skittish it was, partly because front suspension exists now and I'm not that nostalgic.


I'm afraid I can't agree with the statement that mountain bikers are not interested in hard tails anymore. When my club goes out on an MTB ride including Leigh Woods and Ashton Court, I don't think there is a single Full Susser in the group. We also have a qualified MTB instructor who favours hard tail and he is into some quite extreme riding.

Hugs
Archeress x


----------



## Learnincurve (8 Jul 2014)

I may be getting the terms wrong when I say hard tail I mean no suspension at all, not no rear suspension which I've never used as they are too heavy and all your pedal power is going into your rear suspension. 

You youngsters, don't know you've been born, pffsh in my day bikes were hewn from iron, didn't bounce, and at least one person in the group would break something or go home bleeding per ride.


----------



## Crackle (8 Jul 2014)

Learnincurve said:


> I think it's all down to the individual, the riding style and the terrain. I used to do a lot of riding on the technical rough stuff using my old school hardtail with 26 inch wheels, and I went out on the hardtail 700c with MTB wheels on it for the first time in years and years the other day and I was fighting the bike and not the hills. "oh god, _why are you doing that_" was the theme of the day. I'm absolutely sure it was the larger wheel size, it's hard to describe but it felt like the steering was disconnected from the ground. It's not the first time this happened either, it felt like that on grass/light mud with the hybrid tyres on, but on the other side of the coin it loves gravel no matter what tires you have.
> 
> in conclusion. I'm not convinced by 29ers at all for heavy off road use, but I absolutely can see their virtue for lighter off road stuff gravel/old train lines/packed earth


Is this a hybrid or a mtn bike. What bike is it?


----------



## Archeress (8 Jul 2014)

Learnincurve said:


> I may be getting the terms wrong when I say hard tail I mean no suspension at all, not no rear suspension which I've never used as they are too heavy and all your pedal power is going into your rear suspension.
> 
> You youngsters, don't know you've been born, pffsh in my day bikes were hewn from iron, didn't bounce, and at least one person in the group would break something or go home bleeding per ride.



Ah, that explains it then, a hard tail has front shocks but no rear shocks. I would agree then that most MTBers would not have a fully rigid bike.

Hugs
Archeress x


----------



## Learnincurve (8 Jul 2014)

Crackle said:


> Is this a hybrid or a mtn bike. What bike is it?



I'm old, and stopped bouncing around the pennine trail when front suspension came in so it turns out my bike language is somewhat out of date. We called what you now call ridged, hard tail and bikes with front suspension "suspension bikes". Everyone in my youth rode bikes with no suspension. The bike I had problems with being too twitchy was the hybrid with 29er mountain bike tyres on which turned it into a ridged mountain bike - and there is the hybrid scam, I paid £150 for my bike second hand, which is actually a fair price, but it was £400 new. Who in their right mind would pay £400 for a ridged mountain bike with V brakes and tourney gears? No one, but swap the wheels and call it a hybrid...


----------



## Crackle (8 Jul 2014)

Learnincurve said:


> I'm old, and stopped bouncing around the pennine trail when front suspension came in so it turns out my bike language is somewhat out of date. We called what you now call ridged, hard tail and bikes with front suspension "suspension bikes". Everyone in my youth rode bikes with no suspension. The bike I had problems with being too twitchy was the hybrid with 29er mountain bike tyres on which turned it into a ridged mountain bike - and there is the hybrid scam, I paid £150 for my bike second hand, which is actually a fair price, but it was £400 new. Who in their right mind would pay £400 for a ridged mountain bike with V brakes and tourney gears? No one, but swap the wheels and call it a hybrid...


You're not that old. I've only just stopped riding a rigid 26, now set up for touring. There's quite a difference in today's 29ers, I'm not sure what you have is directly comparable.


----------



## Learnincurve (8 Jul 2014)

I feel old when you see fit young men posting about 22mph averages  I know I'm not explaining myself very well, but it was the feel of the extra height and how it felt that little bit more disconnected from the ground which made me prefer the 26 inch for heavy trails. But that's just me, I have no doubt that someone else will feel exactly the opposite. What I'm saying about hybrids is that in my opinion if you are buying a hybrid new and above £300 then you need to look very hard at 29ers and what you intend to be doing on your bike.


----------



## marzjennings (9 Jul 2014)

Learnincurve said:


> I may be getting the terms wrong when I say hard tail I mean no suspension at all, not no rear suspension which I've never used as they are too heavy and all your pedal power is going into your rear suspension.



Yea, because a full sus'er could never win the world cup and the olympics..







.. and a 29er to boot.


----------



## Learnincurve (9 Jul 2014)

I've been quite careful to stress in this thread that it's up to the individual and that others may have the opposite opinion to me. People can get a bit overly defensive when they see a perceived insult to their baby. 
Even when I was as fit as a butcher's dog I would never have had the power in my legs to handle a full suspension 29er on the uphill bits. It's madness to say what's right for a male Olympic athlete at the top of his game is also right for a ordinary 5ft 6 woman so no, I've never used a bike with rear suspension.
.


----------



## Jody (9 Jul 2014)

Learnincurve said:


> Even when I was as fit as a butcher's dog I would never have had the power in my legs to handle a full suspension 29er on the uphill bits.......................... I've never used a bike with rear suspension.
> .



How do you know you couldn't handle it? I think you would be very surprised how well some XC orientated FS bikes ride.


----------



## hotmetal (11 Jul 2014)

Well I'm the odd one out then, alongside my 26" Jekyll full susser I also have a 1988 (yes eighty-eight) Cannondale that was fully rigid, with a 24" back wheel for strength and 26" front for obstacle clearance. That was the year before RockShox were invented! When sus forks became available over here I did put a pair on though, and while I now wish I still had the original rigid fork for it so I could put it back to how it was supposed to be, I definitely don't take it off road now I have a full susser. But plenty of people still ride quite gnarly stuff on hardtails. A mate of mine rides a Santa Cruz hardtail, and he finds long travel all-mountain bikes (of any wheel size) vague. Although that's probably as much to do with geometry as wheel size.

I've been dimly aware of the existence of 29ers for a couple of years, one of the guys I ride off road with had one for a while, but I'm ashamed to say I only actually heard of 650b the day before yesterday! When I took my Jekyll in to be serviced this morning, the guy apologised for the lack of 26" tyres in stock. I was like WTF?! I think I must have been hiding under a rock instead of hopping over them. 

On that basis I can claim absolutely zero authority when I say that the cynic in me suspects that it's all about having something new to market. The less cynical side of me reckons that maybe 29" was slightly too far from 26" in terms of how they feel off road, so they brought out the 650b as a middle ground incorporating some of the strength, nimble handling etc of 26 with a touch of the speed and smoothness of 29. But given that when I got my first Cannondale 24" was where it's at, wheel size is one of those things that will probably change periodically with MTBs.


----------



## mustang1 (11 Jul 2014)

Are 29er wheels weaker because the spokes are longer?
29ers are heavier: wheels are tires are bigger.
29er is less nimble: longer wheelbase, bigger wheels.
29ers are less available in much of the world.

I'm kinda in the market for an MTB and right now all k care about is a decent bike at a good price, don't care about wheel size much. I've not ridden anything but a 26 for years and (having notmridden anything else) prefer it.


----------



## cezaryc (17 Jul 2014)

I've just moved from 26 to 29er this year (hardtail). The difference is huge (I use it for MTB marathons, easy to medium technical difficulty). It gives more comfort and confidence, and you have also a wide choice of wheels and tyres on the market to match your preference. If you are not technically expert and ride technical terrain nor really short I would go for 29, otherwise 650b (but it would not make the big difference if you think of moving from 26 IMHO)


----------



## Mike! (28 Jul 2014)

I've done the opposite to most people at the moment too I guess, just purchased a second hand 26" FS.

The benefit to people not wanting to buy them new drives down the price :-) for me a prefer a more involving and exciting ride when off road!


----------



## Gravity Aided (29 Jul 2014)

I've got some rebuilding to do, but my Specialized Hardrock (someone _gave_ me) is a real revelation to just how good a 26er can be. What has taken place in the last few years with mountain bikes is nothing short of amazing. What little I've ridden it before I get to work on rehabbing it is pretty impressive. I was given it because it was unfixable by the folks who had it before, but it's much nicer than many other older mtbs from before(including all that I have owned previously). As for 29", I've tried that on trails, and I find it smoother and nicer to ride on straight trail, and very compliant on hills, but when you start throwing curves and banks at them, I prefer 26" for the nimbleness and finesse it affords the rider.


----------



## mrbikerboy73 (31 Jul 2014)

27.5 it is then!


----------



## Ticktockmy (31 Jul 2014)

The discussions about the difference between the different size wheels seems some what amusing to me. In my mind the difference is purely the mind, and the power of the Marketing Guru's. I think what happens that the sales pitch sounds really wonderful, so having spent a fortune in purchasing the Bike that the sales folk have said it the best thing since sliced bread was invented, folk convince themselves that what they have bought is the best thing ever invented, when in reality it no better or worse than other size wheels


----------



## djb1971 (31 Jul 2014)

Ticktockmy said:


> In my mind the difference is purely the mind



Wrong

There are differences between 26 and 29. These are differences you can feel when riding both of the sizes, I ride both. 

I won't go over the pros and cons, just google.


----------

