# 26" obsolete?



## plume (May 26, 2006)

I had a sales rep tell me the other day that a SS specific bike with 26" wheels is obsolete.

I call bvllshit. Dear bike industry: 700c wheels aren't for everyone, including me! not saying that I wouldn't give it another try, but I love my 26" wheels. 

there's got to be others out there who agree w/ me. Or am I alone holding onto my small small wheels? lol...

basically I was just put off by that statement. If you love your 29er, great - I'm just saying that not everyone in the world thinks it's the next great thing. fair enough?


----------



## HomeGrownSS (Jan 18, 2006)

yes, totally dead. except for smaller riders, everyone should be on a 29" wheel.


----------



## CB2 (May 7, 2006)

I just pulled the trigger on a Soma Juice yesterday. It was just too good a deal!
As I was riding my ol' pal Stumpy last night, I couldn't help but thinking the Juice will have some mighty big shoes to fill; Stumpy's such a great ride.
But at least I'll know first hand what all the fuss is about.


----------



## micky (Jan 28, 2004)

*I would not call it obsolete*

From what I can see, it is a very competitive alternative. Before, 26" had a monopoly and now 29" are making a serious statement. From what I can tell (I have not ridden one....yet) it is a little different and better suited for taller riders and faster terrain such as fire roads or non-twisty trails (this is not a fact just an observation). Smaller riders or trails that are tight and twisty will (for the most part) be better suited for 26" bikes.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

Yup...dead. Sell it and get a 29er before they all laugh at you.


----------



## EastCoast (Sep 25, 2005)

Could be, but it just seems odd to think that a classic bike like the Surly 1x1 would be 'obsolete'.


----------



## Acme54321 (Oct 8, 2003)

Singlespeeds are what's obsolete. Geez, hello 1907.


----------



## Strike the primer (Jan 27, 2006)

First I died when SS died last week now the sequel.


----------



## monocognizant (Jul 10, 2007)

HomeGrownSS said:


> yes, totally dead. except for smaller riders, everyone should be on a 29" wheel.


I personally have decided to save some money by skipping the 29er fad and wiating for 36ers to become popular. Oh, maybe I should skip 36ers and wait for the 48er. :madman:


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

Acme54321 said:


> Singlespeeds are what's obsolete. Geez, hello 1907.


We Singlespeeds are just trying to even the field so you can hang!:ciappa:


----------



## Low_Rider (Jan 15, 2004)

What’s a 29er?


----------



## no one in particular (Jan 30, 2004)

plume said:


> I had a sales rep tell me the other day that a SS specific bike with 26" wheels is obsolete.


Greetings, plume.

I reckon that all depends why you ride the 26" bike. I love my Reign because it's great on rough terrain and I can ride it fast without pain. I love my rigid ss because it's real hard to ride--it offers a great contrast. If it had 29" wheels on my rigid ss it may be easier, but that's not why I enjoy it so much.


----------



## ernesto_from_Wisconsin (Jan 12, 2004)

*parts*

oh no! where will I find parts?


----------



## Pluto Pilot (Feb 20, 2004)

That's laughable. I rode 29ers for two years and I've switched back to 26ers. And no, I'm not some big hit suspension guy...I only ride rigid singlespeeds. 26ers are quicker, and on terrain that is straight up and down where I live, better. If I lived in Kansas or the interior plains of Mongolia, maybe I'd go with a 29er, but not for here. Plus, when you are hike-a-biking up some 35° scree slope, the big wheels on a 29er keeps smacking you in the face. Tell that bike shop mechanic he needs a stiff prison dicking, or maybe just don't buy a bike from him.


----------



## ferday (Jan 15, 2004)

> 26ers are quicker, and on terrain that is straight up and down where I live, better.


for *you* perhaps. i live on a front range as well, and prefer the 29er for much of the rides. the "slow handling" thing is a myth.


----------



## Pluto Pilot (Feb 20, 2004)

Ferday - of course for me! This ain't an encyclopedia. I believe that for straight up, straight down stuff....like riding up to Bridal Falls in Telluride, much of the stuff in Silverton and here in Eldora where we are ringed in by mountains on three sides, a 26" bike is superior if you are going singlespeed. So much of this riding is done at EXTREMELLY low RPM's, so basically you are almost starting from a stop on every pedal stroke, in which case the force to get the wheel moving does come into play. It's unrealistic for 99% of folks to just hammer full bore at high altitude up a steep, scree filled slope...I'm talking 11,000 feet plus...for more than a few minutes and not explode. You can definitely feel the difference between the two wheel sizes in these situations. Granted, this does not cover most folks riding, but as a true high altitude climbing machine for singlespeeds, assuming you are under 6 feet tall, I think a 26" bike is better. Plus, when you get off and have to hike, that big ass wheel isn't smacking you in the face.

Of course, ride what you want. As Matt Chester said (who is still building me a 29er singlespeed...), "we're not building the space shuttle here."


----------



## CB2 (May 7, 2006)

Pluto Pilot said:


> he needs a stiff prison dicking


Ouch.


----------



## SanAnMan (Mar 22, 2004)

*Full Circle*

Single speed bikes in the 70's, road bikes in the 80's, rigid forks on MTB's in the 90's, hardtails for racing in the early 2000's, etc. They were all labeled obsolete at various times in history. It all goes full circle - nothing ever really dies when it comes to bikes. And... MTBR will have a forum for every one of them.


----------



## DocAltie (Feb 7, 2006)

Bottom Line: It's about the RIDER not the BIKE.

A great rider will leave anyone in the dust no matter he/she rides a 29 or 26 wheelset. Doesn't matter.

A rider out to have fun will have fun on either a 26 or 29 wheelset.

A poor rider will get smoked no matter the wheelset.


It just doesn't matter unless you are a pro racer that is looking for a small edge or a bike geek that must have what is new and cool. I know both types, and the people that ride for fun never have to worry about any of that crap.

26ers are obsolete.... ********. Maybe bikes are obsolete because motorcycles are faster and in some cases cheaper.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

ferday said:


> for *you* perhaps. i live on a front range as well, and prefer the 29er for much of the rides. the "slow handling" thing is a myth.


Dido ferday, I'm with you on the myth's of the 29er, the Front Range has been very kind to my 29er.


----------



## al415 (Mar 17, 2007)

If I feel like "long-boarding" it, just rolling along and being smooth, I ride my 29er (on-one). If I feel like really attacking the technical stuff I ride my converted Bontrager race-lite. The 29er is a momentum machine, it allows me to save energy if I don't feel like really putting out. The Bontrager (26 obviously) is a full on race bike. The harder you push the 26" bike the more it rewards you. Not so of the 29er, which rewards a more fluid style. This is why I keep one of each. 

Whenever I really hit a nice section of trail on either bike I think "This is the only bike I really need". Until the next time I ride the other one...


----------



## lubes17319 (Dec 19, 2005)

For me, yeah, 26" is obsolete. 
But, I stand about 6'4", so the big wheels feel gooooooood. 
I now have a bike that fits! w/out 27" of seatpost on a mutant frame.

I thought the front range would hurt too much (just moved here), but it's been treating me nice-like so far. Time to go higher!!!


----------



## Hurricane Jeff (Jan 1, 2006)

Musta been the sales rep for Niner Bikes!
While 29" wheeled bikes are coming on strong, they'll never replace the 26" wheeled bike.
I say we all should demand a bike made with 27.5" wheels, that way it would be a happy medium!


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

I rode a 29er for a year and loved it. But I needed to cut down on my collection and of the two rigid singlespeeds I owned the 26" bike was the better spec'd, lighter choice.

Personally, I think the pros & cons of each are real, but overplayed by partisans. Where I'm riding on the Wasatch front, either one is a blast.

I do agree on the hike-a-bike. Scrambling up crazy steep, twisty game trails through dense oak brush is hard enough with 26" wheels. Not that this is what bikes are designed for. . .


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

Maybe he was a rep for a shop that stocked every one of the half-dozen or more rigid 29er singlespeeds that cropped up last year and now needs to get them sold to make room for full carbon AM bikes this year.


----------



## moschika (Jan 12, 2004)

about as obsolete as rigid forks. i mean who would use those anyway.


----------



## miSSionary (Jun 29, 2005)

moschika said:


> about as obsolete as rigid forks. i mean who would use those anyway.


Your avatar rocks!!:cornut:


----------



## delay (Jun 29, 2007)

perhaps not as "hip" at the moment, but certainly not obsolete.


----------



## LIFECYCLE (Mar 8, 2006)

Well, i am going to ride my 26 inch singlespeed for as long as I want to.And that will be for a long time yet.:thumbsup:


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 26, 2005)

*26" will live on.........*



LIFECYCLE said:


> Well, i am going to ride my 26 inch singlespeed for as long as I want to.And that will be for a long time yet.:thumbsup:


Wheel size is primarily based on rider size.

My..

2 year old rides a 12" wheeled bike
6 year old rides a 20"
10 year old rides a 26"

At 6'2" why would I a ride 26" wheeled bike 

IME for bigger guys it is a must.....for the average size rider it is a _choice_:thumbsup:


----------



## LIFECYCLE (Mar 8, 2006)

I can see your point but its not always the rule.One of my bikes has a 24 inch rear and my height had nothing what so ever to do with buying that bike.


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 26, 2005)

*I was referencing....*



LIFECYCLE said:


> I can see your point but its not always the rule.One of my bikes has a 24 inch rear and my height had nothing what so ever to do with buying that bike.


mainly CC bikes.

My....

6 year olds BMX bike has 16" wheels
10 year has 20" wheels

yes I agree with the "intended application" argument


----------



## Pluto Pilot (Feb 20, 2004)

Your 2 year old rides bikes? That's impressive.

I coach kids biking. And while this is not an absolute, I'd say most kids between 8 and 10 are better off on 24 inch wheels.

Humans have a pretty neat ability to look at something and tell if it's proportional. It's a skill used in art, architecture and clothing design. It applies to this debate as well. If it looks right, it probably is...sort of the nature effect. If someone is super top heavy and the wheels look tiny, they'd probably be better on a 29er. However, anyone up to 5'10" to 6'0" isn't necessarily going to have this appearance. I'm 5'10" plus change, and when I rode around on a 29er it looked kind of silly...I'm also kind of spindly so I think weight matters too if going by the appearance thing. The 26 inch bike looks a little bit better proportioned.

The average height in the U.S. is what...5'9" for males, 5'4" for females. Obviously the vast majority of people could go either way. Yeah, if you are 6'3" it's kind of no brainer, but most folks are not.

It's interesting - the tallest country in the world is Netherlands, where the average height for males is 6'0". Isn't that where Cloxxi is from, who I think is the biggest 29er advocate around.



DeeZee said:


> Wheel size is primarily based on rider size.
> 
> My..
> 
> ...


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 26, 2005)

*I forgot to say that.....*



Pluto Pilot said:


> Your 2 year old rides bikes? That's impressive.
> 
> I coach kids biking. And while this is not an absolute, I'd say most kids between 8 and 10 are better off on 24 inch wheels.
> 
> ...


_I coach kids biking. And while this is not an absolute, I'd say most kids between 8 and 10 are better off on 24 inch wheels. _

my 10 year old is huge (over 5')

My two year old had / has _the advantage _of watching his brothers ride bikes and motorcycles since he was born. He can also ride a Razor:thumbsup:

Fit is everything. I love m-bikes (like most of you) and have been riding since the late 80's. The first time I rode a 29" wheeled SS I was blown away. So much that I sold all of my 26" wheeled bikes. For me it was like "finally a bike that I fit in and not on top".:thumbsup:

29'ers are old new for Cloxx. He is looking to build a 36'er (no joke):eekster:


----------



## PeanutButterBreath (Oct 7, 2005)

Pluto Pilot said:


> Humans have a pretty neat ability to look at something and tell if it's proportional. It's a skill used in art, architecture and clothing design. It applies to this debate as well. If it looks right, it probably is...sort of the nature effect. If someone is super top heavy and the wheels look tiny, they'd probably be better on a 29er. However, anyone up to 5'10" to 6'0" isn't necessarily going to have this appearance. I'm 5'10" plus change, and when I rode around on a 29er it looked kind of silly...I'm also kind of spindly so I think weight matters too if going by the appearance thing. The 26 inch bike looks a little bit better proportioned.
> 
> The average height in the U.S. is what...5'9" for males, 5'4" for females. Obviously the vast majority of people could go either way. Yeah, if you are 6'3" it's kind of no brainer, but most folks are not.
> 
> It's interesting - the tallest country in the world is Netherlands, where the average height for males is 6'0". Isn't that where Cloxxi is from, who I think is the biggest 29er advocate around.


That's an intersting perspective, but I don't think that our innate sense of aesthetics necessarily corresponds to functional design. It might influence people _perception_ of what a well fitting, well handling bike "should" look like.

I am a little over 6'3" and I fit fine on a 20" frame for 26" wheels as well as a L Karate Monkey. I am mostly leg, so that skews things a bit. Nevertheless, I don't think either looks out of proportion. If there is a height above which a bike looks funny and handles funny, I think it must be much taller than I am and probably includes a very tiny percentage of the human population.


----------



## tvrbob86 (Aug 5, 2005)

Hurricane Jeff said:


> I say we all should demand a bike made with 27.5" wheels, that way it would be a happy medium!


Where've you been?


----------



## tvrbob86 (Aug 5, 2005)

miSSionary said:


> Dido ferday, I'm with you on the myth's of the 29er, the Front Range has been very kind to my 29er.


Thank you. Illiteracy is funny.


----------



## xc-ss'er (Jul 11, 2006)

DeeZee said:


> Wheel size is primarily based on rider size.
> 
> My..
> 
> ...


My dad stands at 6'4" and is 43 and he rides a 20 inch...
I'm 5'10" and 15 years old and I ride a 26"...


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 26, 2005)

*Dad*



xc-ss'er said:


> My dad stands at 6'4" and is 43 and he rides a 20 inch...
> I'm 5'10" and 15 years old and I ride a 26"...


He is about my size (and age). This is a m-bike ......right?


----------



## ACS (Mar 23, 2004)

DeeZee said:


> Wheel size is primarily based on rider size.
> 
> My..
> 
> ...


I'm also 6'2" and I ride 26's. After owning two 29" wheeled bikes, I went back to my 1x1. To each his own I guess.


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

so... saying that a 26" wheel set is obsolete, is in fact snobbery elitism after all.

that's what I thought.


----------



## ernesto_from_Wisconsin (Jan 12, 2004)

*this morning...*

I rode over to the very super hip coffee shop...on my way there, some guy threw an orange at me for riding a 26" bike, gave me the finger, and hurt my ego.

I guess...a 26" bike is as good as a Tandy computer.


----------



## no one in particular (Jan 30, 2004)

plume said:


> so... saying that a 26" wheel set is obsolete, is in fact snobbery elitism after all.


Right. A bit like looking down on someone for riding a Zion.


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 26, 2005)

*Your right*



ACS said:


> I'm also 6'2" and I ride 26's. After owning two 29" wheeled bikes, I went back to my 1x1. To each his own I guess.


To each is own

Curious

What 29'ers did you own?
How long did you have them?
What didn't you like?


----------



## Cloxxki (Jan 11, 2004)

micky said:


> From what I can tell (I have not ridden one....yet) it is a little different and better suited for taller riders and faster terrain such as fire roads or non-twisty trails (this is not a fact just an observation). Smaller riders or trails that are tight and twisty will (for the most part) be better suited for 26" bikes.


The lower rider height threshold or 29" is of course taller than with 26". However, maybe that doesn't mean it's for tall people. Sure, if tall people need to make a pick, they'll get the biggest they can. But they can't get something that's too big right now. Even a 6' rider can't.

If you read more about the subject, or even get some serious ride time on a 29"er, you'll find that larger wheels don't offer much (or any) of an edge on fast, cornerless trails. The edge comes when the going gets tough. Roots, mud, sand, steep up or down, hard cornering.
We picked the most twisty course in my country (estimated 200 corners for 7km) for the 2005 national SS champs, 4 laps. I dropped my singletrack-idol aboard his 26" bike on the twistiest of sections. He closed the gap some on the straights. He really was the better rider, but my 29"er's natural pace through twisties wore him out. Hard to picture, I realize that. Try a 29"er, ride it hard.

Up to 5'5" tall, 26" is great. Over that, the advantages of larger wheels really start to outweigh the slightly more impratical scale of it all.


----------



## ACS (Mar 23, 2004)

DeeZee said:


> What 29'ers did you own?
> How long did you have them?
> What didn't you like?


A GF x-caliber and an Inbred. I had both bikes for about a year each. It's not that I didn't like either bike, it's that I liked my old 26" bike more. It just handled better. Someone mentioned a longboard analogy, and I think that was pretty spot on. It could have been the longer wheelbase, my not so light wheelset, my local trails...I'm not really sure. I looked into geometry issues and upgrades and instead of spending a couple grand, I sold the bike. I'm only 10% regretful.


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

no one in particular said:


> Right. A bit like looking down on someone for riding a Zion.


Point taken.

I never suggested that I _wasn't_ a bike snob myself. :thumbsup:

it works for you? that's what matters.


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

and just to make it clear... I'm NOT anti-29er, I just think it's silly to think that everyone would want to be on one. Seems limiting to me.


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 26, 2005)

*Never tried the Inbred&#8230;*



ACS said:


> A GF x-caliber and an Inbred. I had both bikes for about a year each. It's not that I didn't like either bike, it's that I liked my old 26" bike more. It just handled better. Someone mentioned a longboard analogy, and I think that was pretty spot on. It could have been the longer wheelbase, my not so light wheelset, my local trails...I'm not really sure. I looked into geometry issues and upgrades and instead of spending a couple grand, I sold the bike. I'm only 10% regretful.


But had two Fishers and they had a _long board _feel to them. It took four frames until I got the one that I like. My current bike is the best handling bike I have owned period.

Most of these bike companies are finally getting the geometry figured out for 29'ers. In the past they would stretch out a 26'er design so it would fit the larger hoops. Big mistake and as a result a bike that handled like crap.

The newer 29'er designs have most or all of the following traits.
•	Shorter chainstays
•	Shorter top tubes
•	Steeper HT angles
•	SUS forks with increased offset

In the next year or so I think that the long board label will go away.

***EDIT*** Just checked the specs on the Inbred. 70 degree HA.........YIKES! My bike has a 72 degree HA


----------



## ho hum (Jul 13, 2007)

I'm going to put a 29" on the front and 26" on the back. Everybody can like/hate me....

Enter Cher:

:band: 

Half Breed! 
How I learned to hate the world!


----------



## Proformance Cycle (May 28, 2004)

*29er is the S--T*

For me:

All 26ers are JUNK!

My entire fleet is being replaced by 29er, 69er, or 96ers.....After I rode over stuff that I had to work really hard to clean on A 26er the 29er is the WAY! All Thanks to an inexpensive Redline Monocog 29er!

Ride What "You" like...................:thumbsup:


----------



## quaffimodo (May 25, 2004)

plume said:


> I had a sales rep tell me the other day that a SS specific bike with 26" wheels is obsolete.
> 
> I call bvllshit. Dear bike industry: 700c wheels aren't for everyone, including me! not saying that I wouldn't give it another try, but I love my 26" wheels.
> 
> ...


And he was selling........let me guess.......??? Or maybe he was just an idiot.


----------



## Bike Nazi (Apr 3, 2004)

*About as obsolete as two ply toilet paper*



plume said:


> I had a sales rep tell me the other day that a SS specific bike with 26" wheels is obsolete.
> 
> I call bvllshit. Dear bike industry: 700c wheels aren't for everyone, including me! not saying that I wouldn't give it another try, but I love my 26" wheels.
> 
> ...


or a whore on a Friday night.


----------



## Godless Communist (May 8, 2007)

I swear to god, if people can't decide for themselves which of the two available mountain bike wheel sizes is right for them without consulting a dealer and a forum, they should take up another sport that isn't so controversial. Like knitting, perhaps.

The 26-inch wheel is dead. So are singlespeeds, toeclips, rim brakes, "urban fixies," punk rock, and tofurkey. So fu</>cking what? Jebus, I wonder what would happen if suddenly there was no one around to validate the choices we make.


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

Godless Communist said:


> I swear to god, if people can't decide for themselves which of the two available mountain bike wheel sizes is right for them without consulting a dealer and a forum, they should take up another sport that isn't so controversial. Like knitting, perhaps.
> 
> The 26-inch wheel is dead. So are singlespeeds, toeclips, rim brakes, "urban fixies," punk rock, and tofurkey. So fu</>cking what? Jebus, I wonder what would happen if suddenly there was no one around to validate the choices we make.


dude read the thread. No one is using this thread to decide what type of bike is right for them. It was merely a reaction to what I thought was a stupid statement to make about 26" wheels - especially someone who is representing part of the industry. that's all.

believe me, I'll ride what works for me w/out validation from others! You know how much flack I've taken for riding a c'dale w/ a (OMG it's not a fox front end...) headshock?


----------



## Godless Communist (May 8, 2007)

plume said:


> dude read the thread. No one is using this thread to decide what type of bike is right for them. believe me, I'll ride what works for me w/out validation from others!


Dude, read your own validation-seeking words:

*"there's got to be others out there who agree w/ me."
*

Anyway, my rant wasn't directed entirely at you, but to this whole stupid topic that rears its head every four days around here. Between the 29er zealots with their sophomoric put-downs and the hand-wringing worrywart 26ers who are afraid to be left behind on the next big trend, you'd think no one had the capacity to simply ride the bike they actually like, based on their own conclusions.

Glad to hear that you've risen above it. Sorry if I was out of line.


----------



## pahearn (Feb 17, 2006)

Just last night I took my long-neglected 26er out for a spin, and I have to say -- despite the initial feelings of instability (due to being accustomed to my 29er), and despite the fact that my favorite bike out of whole stable is the 29er by FAR, I still had a blast on the 26" SS: it's twitchy and snappy and fun in a different way than my 29er. I had recent thoughts of parting it out or selling it outright but I think I'll keep it, I'd forgotten how much fun the little wheels can be. As my 29er SS is rigid I purposely built the 26er SS HT with some suspension to clearly differentiate from the performance of both the rigid 29er and the FS 26er, so that I didn't have "redundant" bicycles in the garage -- and I'm glad I did that. The 26er SS HT is my little "backwoods" bike, the one I take down the street to the local trails every now and again and thrash it. Yeah, tomorrow I'll be back on the 29er and loving it, but switching it up every once in a while is fun.


----------



## Earthpig (Jan 23, 2004)

Godless Communist said:


> Between the 29er zealots with their sophomoric put-downs....


I hear that 29'ers are now obsolete and no longer cool.

Discuss.


----------



## Proformance Cycle (May 28, 2004)

Earthpig said:


> I hear that 29'ers are now obsolete and no longer cool.
> 
> Discuss.


 Correct!
Being replaced by 32ers & 36ers:thumbsup:


----------



## moschika (Jan 12, 2004)

*ur all losers on puny wheels*

26", 29" 96, 69 ?

we all know the true answer is 42

but real ss'er ride nothing less then 50" BLAM!!


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

i have to say this much: after seeing so many fast people on 29ers I really have to give it another chance I think!


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

Godless Communist said:


> Dude, read your own validation-seeking words:
> 
> *"there's got to be others out there who agree w/ me."
> *
> ...


I guess I was worried that other companies would follow suit and stop producing SS specific 26 inch bikes. Kinda silly I know. Not so much looking for validation as much as a concern in which direction the industry is headed - 29ers are becoming so popular that I could see manufacturers going that direction exclusively.

hm. I feel like I've already said all this though... carry on.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Isn't there anything else to talk about?


----------



## rallyKia (Jul 29, 2007)

Dude, 26" is so not obsolete here. I ride with a coaster brake, and that I will admit IS obsolete, at least in the woods, but it is fun and challenging, so I ride it. I have never ridden a 29er yet, but until more 29" tires are sold in my neck of the woods, I'll continue to ride my 26" ride until it kills me. Which could easily happen next time the brake smokes halfway down a big hill.....


----------



## aka brad (Dec 24, 2003)

*I guess it depends what he's selling..*



plume said:


> I had a sales rep tell me the other day that a SS specific bike with 26" wheels is obsolete.


 There is a lot of truth to what the sales rep says if you are looking @ what your LBS is selling in the way of a dedicated SS bike. I see less and less 26ers and more 29ers; but that is just what's selling. I don't see how he was making some sweeping statement about the death of 26 inch single speeds, I think he was simply commenting on the fact that the 29ers are what's moving right now.

Brad


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

Nat said:


> Isn't there anything else to talk about?


how many topics are there really for bikes with one gear?


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

plume said:


> how many topics are there really for bikes with one gear?


Haw! Good one! I think I will make a sticker that reads, "One f*cking topic!"

We could always discuss why those a-hole [fill-in-the-blank] jerks never wave, or we could discuss "who has the right-of-way, singlespeeders or gearies?"

Today I rode my rigid 26er with rim brakes. Even though I prefer the 29er, I still had a lot of fun. In the past two weeks I've ridden my trekking bike, my road bike, my 29er, my rigid 26er, and a 6+6 fully. Don't cry for me Argentina.


----------



## Flat Ark (Oct 14, 2006)

ferday said:


> for *you* perhaps. i live on a front range as well, and prefer the 29er for much of the rides. the "slow handling" thing is a myth.


I wouldn't call it a myth, but an opinion. I find 29ers to be clumsy handlers. I also find 26ers better going up hills.


----------



## Flat Ark (Oct 14, 2006)

I rode a 17mile SS race a couple of weeks ago that involved A LOT of climbing. A lot of slippery rocks. A lot of long, fast, rocky downhills. At least 25 tight tight switchbacks, both up and downhill. There were 29ers, 26ers and several 96/69ers, some rigid and some suspended. There were about twenty of us riding SS and we left the line with the "sport" group. The fastest guy out of everyone (geared or SS) was a rider on a 26" SS. Was it the 26" wheels? I don't think so. He was just a superior rider and is obviously more comfortable on the smaller wheels. The best wheel size is what you as an individual prefer.:thumbsup:


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

Nat said:


> Haw! Good one! I think I will make a sticker that reads, "One f*cking topic!"


sounds like a plan. go flame bait someone else. I ain't bitin...

:thumbsup:


----------



## Wrex Everything (Oct 29, 2006)

moschika said:


> 26", 29" 96, 69 ?
> 
> we all know the true answer is 42
> 
> but real ss'er ride nothing less then 50" BLAM!!


Yeah Moshika! Now THAT's what I'm talkin' bout. The Penny Farthing (Sp?) is the shizzy...

Bow down to the "new" marketing juggernaut...


----------



## bikeuphill9 (Apr 23, 2006)

I don't own a 29'er yet. I have ridden one around for a few minutes, hopping curbs and small drops. It rode great. But right now my 26'ers are all I need. One full sus. One hardtail SS (possibly rigid soon). They are just as fun as anything else I have ridden. Of course my boss and head mechanic took his C'dale hardtail and put 24" wheels on it. He will never ride 26" again, or 29" for that matter. Long live small wheels!


----------



## his dudeness (May 9, 2007)

Wow. Singlespeeders arguing about the obsolescence of the 26 inch wheel.

You know, a lot of people in bike shops (and MTBR forums) come up with an opinion, and next thing you know they're an expert. I'm personally waiting for someone on here to call you guys out on all of the coasting that you're doing on the trail. I'd love someone to say "Freewheels are obsolete... buy a mtb fixie it's the new "in" thing to do." 

Hoestly. Not trying to piss anyone off, just poking fun. Ya'll can kick my ass up hills and do it with one gear and that impresses the hell out of me you iron lunged, horse legged soldiers. But seriously ride what works best for you. 26 and 29er wheels both have their strengths and weaknesses, there will never be one better than the next, just different.

26 good- strong, accelerate faster, less rotational weight, and are a bit more maneuverable.
29 good- keep speed so much easier, can flow over so many trail obstacles with ease, and are probably faster on the flats due to the larger circumference
26 bad- well they can get stuck in roots and ruts easier.
29 bad- 29er wheels are about as strong as a wet noodle, and about as stiff too. I can't count on one hand the amount of pro built 29er wheels I've blown through. But I can count only three 26er wheels that I've gone through. 

Of course this is just MY personal experience from using both. I'm 6'3, 200, and I put my bike things through a lot of abuse, and I'm sure there are a lot of people out there like me, and I'm sure some have different opinions. But these are my opinions... not backed up by magazines or industry insiders, etc. I love 26er's and I like 29er's. 

And if anyone on this thread hears any opinions as strong as "26 inch wheels are obsolete" from bike shop rats, well either the shop rats are retarted for basing their opinions off of magazines and forums like this, or you are retarted for listening to them.


----------



## MtnBikerDan (Aug 9, 2005)

monocognizant said:


> I personally have decided to save some money by skipping the 29er fad and wiating for 36ers to become popular. Oh, maybe I should skip 36ers and wait for the 48er. :madman:


Yeah, thats what I did with the fad of SNOW BOARDING - I just waited for TeleMark!!!


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

I'm so confused now! I really want a 26" BMX Cruiser, I'm really out of the loop!


----------



## plume (May 26, 2006)

I can now name two manufacturers who won't be producing a 26" SS.

L A M E

:thumbsup:


----------



## SuperbMan (Dec 17, 2004)

I don't know-I just bought a 2005 (new) KHS solo one-for $350.00 (tax free I might add-tax free weekend in MA rules!)-I tried some 29ers-they were great-I tried this bike-it's great, too. 

As a number of folks have already said-Rigid Single Speeds are obsolete-that's half the fun! Let the salesmen settle the 26er-29er battle-I say, buy inexpensive bikes and ride the hell out of them.


----------



## disgustipated (Apr 29, 2006)

29 is awesome, i just made the switch a month ago and I love my steel 29er. The differences are there, but i don't think that 29ers are THAT much better/different than 26", not anywhere near enough to deem 26" obsolete. Not like the difference between clipless and basket cages. I agree with previous posters, 1x1's shoes are gonna be hard to fill.


----------



## xray (May 5, 2005)

Geeze, I don't often look at this section of the boards... but really...

It's all about what you ride. For instance I would DESTROY a 29". Those rims wouldn't stand a chance.

Me? I run 24"s. suck it.


----------



## bigchromewheelssuck (Aug 21, 2005)

*just hang on to it....*

before you know it they will cool again. 26 or 29 who cares...just rip


----------



## combatkimura (Jul 17, 2007)

What if one uses a single bike for a wide variety of things because thay don't want to invest the money into niche bikes (FR, DJ, DH...) I ride XC, do some light DJ, smash it around urban type stuff wallrides and such. Sometimes even the 26" wheels feel too big when I'm trying to thrash the bike around, I can't imagine trying to deal with 29s.


----------



## madnessmoose (Aug 22, 2007)

*29ers can be for smaller riders too*



DocAltie said:


> Bottom Line: It's about the RIDER not the BIKE.


FVCK YA!!! Thank you!!!

I'm really sick of people saying 29ers are not for smaller riders... it's Bvllsht! I personally know 3 riders who are 5'6" and under and can absolutely pin it on their 2ers...and also swear by them...and more importantly love to ride them! I don't buy the whole 29ers are more suitable for bigger riders...even if it is just in general.


----------



## Windjammer (May 6, 2007)

I havn't looked at bike prices in a while, but I remember thinking 29'ers looked pretty expensive for what you get.

I think they jack up the price for the 'fad' factor and LBS push them hard because there is extra money there.


----------



## madnessmoose (Aug 22, 2007)

Margins are pretty much the same accross the board...interesting perspective though


----------



## 1speed (Mar 23, 2004)

the unique thing about 29in is that you can market it towards anyone if they have a bike or not. many 29 owners have a 26 or started on 26in. for many, 29in is another bike in the collection even if it is their favorite current ride. this is what we call a plus sale, something that may not have been needed but due to the uniqueness or price point (maybe not price in this case) people make the purchase. 

soon the industry will be pushing the 650 wheel, yet another option$$


----------



## berrywise (Jan 15, 2004)

1speed said:


> the unique thing about 29in is that you can market it towards anyone if they have a bike or not. many 29 owners have a 26 or started on 26in. for many, 29in is another bike in the collection even if it is their favorite current ride. this is what we call a plus sale, something that may not have been needed but due to the uniqueness or price point (maybe not price in this case) people make the purchase.
> 
> soon the industry will be pushing the 650 wheel, yet another option$$


Yeah I've already been hearing the rumble about the 650B. Sounds like they already have some modernized tires for them.

Might as well skip the 29er and just wait for the 650B :thumbsup:


----------



## Kirk Pacenti (Sep 26, 2006)

berrywise said:


> Yeah I've already been hearing the rumble about the 650B. Sounds like they already have some modernized tires for them.
> 
> Might as well skip the 29er and just wait for the 650B :thumbsup:


LOTS OF 650B INFO HERE:

http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/pacenti-introducing-650b-mtb-tires-11794

http://cyclingplus.co.uk/newsdetails.asp?id=688

http://www.frameforum.net/forum2/index.php?showtopic=3034

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/shows/nahmbs07/?id=results/nahmbs074
click thumbnail for more pics.


----------



## Kirk Pacenti (Sep 26, 2006)

*650B at SSWC!*

http://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php?p=3485885&postcount=1

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:


----------

