# 26 vs. 650B vs. 29 for tall XC guys



## TheHolc (May 17, 2016)

I'm sure this topic has been beat to death, I just don't know how to go about searching for something this specific. I'm curious what size wheels would be the better option for a tall guy (6' 4") like myself? I'm searching for a decent FS, but currently own an entry level 650B HT. I for the most part like the 650B but i'm curious if 26" or 29" might be a better option for me? I feel like 26" might involve too much effort to keep up rolling resistance whereas 29" can be a pain for climbing or getting going from slow speeds. I have a buddy who used to ride a FS 26er and he said it feels like a BMX after riding his 29er. Any advice or opinions?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Seeing as the top 10 dudes at this past weekend's XC World Championship were all on 29ers, I'm going out on a limb and saying that climbing on them is not a problem.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Walt (Jan 23, 2004)

There is no downside to a 29er for someone your size. If you were a little bigger, 29+ would be almost mandatory - as it is, it's probably still worth a look.

-Walt


----------



## manpurse (Feb 6, 2011)

I'm 6'4" on an XL Niner RIP. I demo'd a 27.5 recently just to try it out and the 29er feels more proportional so I'll be sticking with the big wheels for now. At first I had to switch my riding style a bit on a 29er but after a few rides I quickly became used to it.


----------



## B1KER (Jul 19, 2006)

I'm 6'2" and 275lbs. I prefer the 650b over the 29er. Of the 29ers that I've test ridden I felt like the larger wheel didn't take the line I wanted as much in the technical sections. I feel like the 650b gives you some of the perks of the 29er but isn't so totally different than the 26er. At the end of the day, I'm sure you won't like hearing this, but you really need to go out and try the different bikes and see what makes you happy. Don't get caught up in wheel size because we all rode 26ers for years and were just fine with them. If budget is a concern there are a lot of great 26ers on Craigslist and Pinkbike. Swap with your buddies on a section of trail. Even if the frame isn't quite the right size you will get a feel for the wheel size.


----------



## AL29er (Jan 14, 2004)

Personally ridden them all. For purely XC the 29er is where it is at. Good traction despite the narrow tires and the contact patch is big enough to keep most silly pinch flats and casing issues at bay. Only issue I have had with 29er and XC is that the tire casings are pretty thin for a clyde, especially converted tubeless.

As most have noticed the racing crowd has also spoken with their wallets on the issue.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

There's almost never a time when 29er isn't better IMO. Trek did a bunch of testing that showed that there was little difference between 26 and 27.5 and that 27.5 was much close to 26 performance than it was to 29er performance. So it's not really the best of both worlds. Really it comes down to what feels better to you but all else being equal, 29er is going to perform better. And like stated...if the pros that depend on winning to put food on the table are running 29" over 27.5...that should tell you all you need to know. I know the pros run the brands that they are sponsored by, but if 27.5 was a better size choice...I'd expect some or most or all would be using it. 

Of course most of this is IMO. But the Trek testing is fact. According to them at least.


----------



## watts888 (Oct 2, 2012)

29er all the way. The bike will just feel more comfortable. I will admit, it's not as easy to do switchbacks as a teeny tiny 26" bike, but at our height, if feels like you're riding a bike they way you rode a 26" bike as a kid. On a 26" bike on trails, I feel like I should have clown shoes and a little red nose because I'm sitting on a toy bike.


----------



## *OneSpeed* (Oct 18, 2013)

absolutely, 29er every time.


----------



## phattruth (Apr 22, 2012)

29'ers are great for big guys, but it will cost you a bit more to get the same weight bike as 29'er frame's, wheels, tires etc... are heavier just because of the wheel size. That said, the bigger wheels are more proportionally sized for a 6'+ guy. You might also look at 27.5+ as they're pretty close to 29'er wheels in diameter, but offer loads of traction.


----------



## Whacked (Sep 29, 2008)

Do you race?
if not, then acceleration shouldn't be a reason.

Get the bike that feels the best.

Oh, and it should be a 29er 

OK, yea I'm biased, but since your a tall guy it might feel more comfortable and not seem like a toy.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

6'5" here and I have a 29er fully and a 29+ fat bike. The 29er is going away for a 29+ fully soon.


----------



## tehllama (Jul 18, 2013)

Tall rider - XC ??? Time to start looking at 29er geometry and parts.

I say geometry because a lot of XL bikes are marginally big enough for people my size (6'2", 35" cycling inseam). Parts, because a lot of XC bikes are specced by product managers on the feedback of 150lb riders, not the feedback of people who are >200lb at single digit body fat.


----------



## RamblerBill (Nov 29, 2015)

I'd point you to a 29er too. I ride a Scott Spark 29er XL. Still have an older 26er that I ride as a backup and after getting used to the 29er the 26 inch wheels just seems less stable, more bumpy and less confidence inspiring. The 26 is definitely more nimble and fun in its own way but I'd not want it for a long ride or for a race. BTW I am 6'1" and 225 lb.


----------



## Crockpot2001 (Nov 2, 2004)

manpurse said:


> I'm 6'4" on an XL Niner RIP. I demo'd a 27.5 recently just to try it out and the 29er feels more proportional so I'll be sticking with the big wheels for now. At first I had to switch my riding style a bit on a 29er but after a few rides I quickly became used to it.


This! I just did the same and it only told me I do not care for 27.5.


----------



## yamato72 (Jun 16, 2016)

watts888 said:


> 29er all the way. The bike will just feel more comfortable. I will admit, it's not as easy to do switchbacks as a teeny tiny 26" bike, but at our height, if feels like you're riding a bike they way you rode a 26" bike as a kid. On a 26" bike on trails, I feel like I should have clown shoes and a little red nose because I'm sitting on a toy bike.


This. You give up some "nimbleness" going from a 26 to a 29, but you gain everywhere else. 6'1, 235lbs and I would never go back.


----------



## Skywalker29 (Nov 24, 2012)

What about 29er vs 29er plus for the big guys of XC or even 27.5plus


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## yamato72 (Jun 16, 2016)

Skywalker29 said:


> What about 29er vs 29er plus for the big guys of XC or even 27.5plus
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No personal experience with them, but 29+ seems to be really have taken off.


----------



## sir_crackien (Feb 3, 2008)

Another vote for 29. There are a number of technical reason that 29ers work better for taller guys (too much to go into here) but its basically has to do with propotions of the rider to bike. I had a 29 cross country bike after having a number of 26 xc-all mountain bikes and I instantly felt more at home on the 29. More to that point once I switched (from a 160mm AM bike to a 100mm XC bike) I promply bested all of be pervious times but up and down segments that I rode regularly. I have since switched to a 140mm 29er all mountain bike and its basically takes all the things I liked about my pervious bikes and wraps it up into one.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

I'm somewhere between 6'4" and 6'5" these days. Within a mile after hopping on the first 29er I ever rode, all of my 26" wheel bikes were for sale. These days, I have now moved on to + size wheels. Currently riding a 29+ hardtail. I like the 650b+/27.5+ bikes I have tried as well (650b+/27.5+ wheels are close to the same diameter as 'regular' 29er wheels).

As much as I am solidly into the bigger wheel sizes, I would still advise you to demo as many bikes as possible to make up your own mind. You might be one of those freaks that thinks they like the smaller wheels. . . . . . LOL, just kidding! Seriously though, go demo some bikes, and get the one you like!

Triple click the paragraph above for further clarification :-D


----------



## TheHolc (May 17, 2016)

jeffj said:


> I'm somewhere between 6'4" and 6'5" these days. Within a mile after hopping on the first 29er I ever rode, all of my 26" wheel bikes were for sale. These days, I have now moved on to + size wheels. Currently riding a 29+ hardtail. I like the 650b+/27.5+ bikes I have tried as well (650b+/27.5+ wheels are close to the same diameter as 'regular' 29er wheels).
> 
> As much as I am solidly into the bigger wheel sizes, I would still advise you to demo as many bikes as possible to make up your own mind. You might be one of those freaks that thinks they like the smaller wheels. . . . . . LOL, just kidding! Seriously though, go demo some bikes, and get the one you like!
> 
> Triple click the paragraph above for further clarification :-D


Lol, you clever dog.

Thanks for all the feedback guys, I didn't expect so much. So I'm just gonna assume everybody is for the 29er lifestyle. Next question. Now I know pretty much every HT is going to be roughly the same in terms of components and geometry in the entry level and beginner class. What sub-1K bike should I be looking into? I would like to have a some what slacker head tube angle that can handle a 120-140mm fork if possible. While I will be doing 80% XC I would like something that I can take to the bike park(Big Bear/Mammoth) with my buddy when he gets back from deployment. Would a 100mm HT be okay with this if certain components are upgraded(brakes, wider bars, tires etc)? I've read up a bit on Diamondback's Overdrive which seems to be a pretty popular 29er and I think it would handle an extra 20mm up front than stock. The reason I mention Diamondback is because I receive a 40% discount through Diamondback from my employer. But I'm open to other options as well. I'm totally open to upgrading and working on my own bike, so I don't necessarily need the best or even great components starting out. Thanks again fellas, happy trails.


----------



## tehllama (Jul 18, 2013)

I'm probably a bit biased (as I run a Diamondback Overdrive [the now deprecated Carbon] with a 130mm fork on it), but on that kind of discount the top end Overdrive is probably one of the best values without dipping into the used market for the use case you're describing... but they're stupidly in the middle of phasing out the 29er Overdrives so I don't know what to tell you.


----------



## TheHolc (May 17, 2016)

tehllama said:


> I'm probably a bit biased (as I run a Diamondback Overdrive [the now deprecated Carbon] with a 130mm fork on it), but on that kind of discount the top end Overdrive is probably one of the best values without dipping into the used market for the use case you're describing... but they're stupidly in the middle of phasing out the 29er Overdrives so I don't know what to tell you.


Yeah more than likely if I did go the Overdrive route, I would pick up a year or two old one before they started going 27.5. There are a ton of them on CL that look almost new because most people around here only use Overdrives for leisurely trail riding. I'm not against the used market at all. I can determine what is good and what is beat up. How does your ride with the 130mm fork? Did it throw off the geometry for you at all?


----------



## TheHolc (May 17, 2016)

I was also looking at the Recoil 29er, it seems to be a good base platform to build off. Opinions?


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

TheHolc said:


> Lol, you clever dog.
> 
> Thanks for all the feedback guys, I didn't expect so much. So I'm just gonna assume everybody is for the 29er lifestyle. Next question. Now I know pretty much every HT is going to be roughly the same in terms of components and geometry in the entry level and beginner class. What sub-1K bike should I be looking into? I would like to have a some what slacker head tube angle that can handle a 120-140mm fork if possible. While I will be doing 80% XC I would like something that I can take to the bike park(Big Bear/Mammoth) with my buddy when he gets back from deployment. Would a 100mm HT be okay with this if certain components are upgraded(brakes, wider bars, tires etc)? I've read up a bit on Diamondback's Overdrive which seems to be a pretty popular 29er and I think it would handle an extra 20mm up front than stock. The reason I mention Diamondback is because I receive a 40% discount through Diamondback from my employer. But I'm open to other options as well. I'm totally open to upgrading and working on my own bike, so I don't necessarily need the best or even great components starting out. Thanks again fellas, happy trails.


PM sent.


----------



## tehllama (Jul 18, 2013)

TheHolc said:


> Yeah more than likely if I did go the Overdrive route, I would pick up a year or two old one before they started going 27.5. There are a ton of them on CL that look almost new because most people around here only use Overdrives for leisurely trail riding. I'm not against the used market at all. I can determine what is good and what is beat up. How does your ride with the 130mm fork? Did it throw off the geometry for you at all?


The geometry changed significantly ~ 69° HTA, 71° STA, gave up about 8mm of BB drop, but it involved upgrading to a better than stock fork. To me, using it as more of a trail/all-around bike, that geo change was positive. To compensate, I put a flat bar on it, inverted both the bar and the stem (a 90mm stem @ -6°, and -5mm rise on the flat bar), and the grips are in the exact same spot. My bike wears a dropper post (had one, put it on, won't take it off) which amusingly has me using it on trails where I see people riding Nomads and such. It's a great climber on technical stuff, and aside from getting spun out above 30mph, still works on roads with Maxxis Aspen tires. I'm traction limited on XC trails where it's loose-over-hard, but this is my bike that sees most of my mileage and is honestly the most fun to ride in most cases.










With options like this ( Diamondback @ The Clymb
Not really that terrible


----------



## TheHolc (May 17, 2016)

tehllama said:


> The geometry changed significantly ~ 69° HTA, 71° STA, gave up about 8mm of BB drop, but it involved upgrading to a better than stock fork. To me, using it as more of a trail/all
> 
> Pardon my obliviousness, but what is bottom bracket drop and how does it effect the ride?


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

Lower bottom bracket generally corners better. 

Bottom bracket too low = possible pedal strikes.

Longer than designed for fork also can make the seat tube angle slack enough (and raise the front end high enough) that it makes it harder to keep the front end down when pedaling up a steep hill. It can also make them corner like a dump truck. You will give up at least some cornering ability. Whether or not it is something you choose to live with, or prefer the longer travel over max potential cornering prowess, is up to you.

My $0.02: If you want a longer travel fork, get a bike that was designed for such a fork.


----------



## tehllama (Jul 18, 2013)

BB drop - if you draw the imaginary line between the front and rear axles, this is how far below that line the center of the crankset is. On 29er hardtails, it's nice to have this in the 2" range. Combining a low BB and high stack up front is usually pretty comfortable, as you feel 'in' the bike more than 'on' the bike, but it's not an exclusively cut and dry thing.

To me, a 20mm delta is still within the design range of simpler hardtails - that 1/4" at most of bottom-bracket delta can be ameliorated with slightly nicer and narrower pedals (less pedal strike AND same low center of gravity? Yes!). Worth a thought.

Would tend to push you towards a larger bike, as both the seat and head tube angles roll back a ways, and it makes the bike obviously taller up front - but it's at most half a size worth of fitment delta.


----------



## Tillers_Rule (Sep 11, 2004)

Climbing has more to do with bike geometry than wheel size. My XL RIP 9 is much better at climbing than my older 26" Stumpjumper, I'm usually in at least one, if not two gears taller on the RIP than on the SJ. The SJ is lighter and more flickable in the corners, but also less stable.

If I had to choose one, I'd go with the RIP anyday.


----------



## MichaelInOr (Aug 16, 2016)

At 6'3" 230lbs I love my 2009 XXL Turner Sultan 29er. I went out for a ride the other day and my Sultan had a flat so I took my old 26er instead. Here is a picture of me on my old 26er:


----------

