26 or 29inch

[marzjennings]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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!]

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]

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]

27.5 it is then!

 

[Ticktockmy]

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]

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.