# Help me decide between 27.5" plus and 29" hardtail



## Mike_biker (Sep 23, 2018)

Hi,

My first post on this forum 

My mtb is 20 years old and I decided to buy a new one. I noticed that today is everything different and more complicated to pick an appropriate bike. I am reading articles, forums and watching youtube for about one month and I feel like I'm back in the beginning.

First I was determined to buy 29" hardtail. Then I started to watch full-suspension 29" bikes, but they are expensive and have higher maintenance costs. Can anyone tell me what are the average costs and how often for cca 2000 eur full suspension bike?

And then I found 27.5" plus bikes (and fat bikes) which have wider tires, but diameter is similar to 29". And they are cheaper than full suspension bikes.

I am deciding now between Orbea Alma 29" hardtail and Orbea Laufey 27.5" plus hardtail.

I wonder how how much faster is 29" hardtail from the 27.5" plus hardtail on the asphalt road?

I'm thinking a lot about the terrains on which I will ride and there are my examples.

Drive to the top of the hill will be on an asphalt road or macedam like this:






























The drive down will also be on the macedam or through the forest paths like this:





























There are roots on some parts.















I would be glad of any help and comments. Thank you.


----------



## GRPABT1 (Oct 22, 2015)

Plus tyres really come into their own on very dry loose and loose over hardpack conditions. That's what I ride on mostly and I love big tyres. If I lived somewhere with nice forest soil I'd probably just ride regular 29" or 27.5.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

As someone who's had a good share of different bikes, started with 26", then moved to 29", then gave B+ a go and then 29+, I can say without a doubt, that if I'm buying a HT, unless it's for racing exclusively, it's going to be PLUS, no question. The PLUS setups just take that extra edge off all those small bumps which can help you if you're getting on in age, also helps with not needing to be off the saddle as much on the smoother chattery surfaces, also increases traction a load. My current preferred setup is a 29+ running 29x3" on i39 rims, I sometimes will run a B+ in the rear to slacken the angles for steeper trails, but actually prefer the handling for my avg riding of rolling, twisty trails more neutral in the 29+ setup.

I say try to get a test ride if you can on those specific bikes, if you can't at least try to test ride bikes with those wheel sizes to get an idea. FYI, I'm on the taller side, so 29+ suits me better I guess.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

General trail riding on a hardtail, plus. General trail riding on a FS, 29 2.3/2.4. IMO.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

sounds to me like OP needs to find some bikes to ride and compare.

All the articles and videos can say everything that's true, but you won't really "get it" until you ride the bikes and feel the differences for yourself.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

You gotta try them out yourself. Personally the only benefits I see from plus tires are comfort and climbing traction.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

To complicate things many 27.5+ bikes can take 29 wheels. Sometimes with a max of a 2.4 tire on the 148 rear. Usually you can fit a 2.8 x 29 tire on the front given the Boost 15x110 fork. Some bikes will take 2.6 x 29 tires on the appropriate width rims 35-40mm inner. The more your bike can fit the better for you. I don't think either of those bikes make the best choice.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

jeremy3220 said:


> You gotta try them out yourself. Personally the only benefits I see from plus tires are comfort and climbing traction.


That's pretty much the point, but it is a little more nuanced than that.

Bigger tires float over small chatter better. Has always been true. 2.2 is better than 2.0. 2.4 is better than 2.2, etc.

It is not just about comfort. Comfort is a side benefit. The real benefit is control. Narrower tires at higher pressures (necessary to avoid rim strikes) will rebound harder off chattery bumps. This is especially true for a hardtail or rigid bike.

For climbing, it depends. I can climb a steep hill on cyclocross tires if it's smooth enough. Bigger tires put more rubber in contact with the trail, and lower pressures alllow those tires to deform around irregularities, so bigger tires become more advantageous on rougher, more technical trails.

BUT, bigger tires can be more draggy on smooth surfaces, they weigh more, and they can have undesirable bounce on rough, high speed trails. So you have to ride some bikes and decide which advantages are priorities, and which negatives you're willing to live with.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk


----------



## GKelley (Sep 4, 2018)

I'm loving my 27.5+ hardtail. Going tubeless and messing with tire pressures has opened up whole new worlds to me. Different pressures make your plus tires more versatile to different types of terrain, and trails. 

I also like the fact that my bike has sliding dropouts, and will take regular 29 tires, if I wish to try those. This trend of 27.5+/29 bikes is becoming very popular for good reason. I'd look for one of those in your situation.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Harold said:


> The real benefit is control.


High speed control is the main downside of plus tires. The biggest deficiency in regular trail tires is how flimsy they are. Avoiding tire squirm, folding and burping are what I base my tire pressure on (not rim strikes). Plus tires are even worse. To fix this problem you need a heavier casing, not a lighter one. Plus tires at high speeds are either going to be bouncier or more squirmy than a regular trail or DH tire. This is a fundamental aspect of tire design; the higher the operating speed, the stiffer the casing/sidewall package needs to be to support the lateral loads. Automotive racing tires can even have steel sidewall reinforcements that aren't found in passenger car tires.

At slower speeds like in loose switchbacks or slower off camber stuff I could see the argument for greater control but I haven't really noticed that on plus tires.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

jeremy3220 said:


> High speed control is the main downside of plus tires.


I think I said that. But plus tires exist on a pretty broad spectrum and really only sit in the middle of it.

So they behave better at high speeds than 5" fatbike tires, and less well than 2.4" mtb tires. What you like is going to depend on where and how you ride, which is why riding bikes is the most important thing to do.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk


----------



## lucifuge (Jul 1, 2011)

I would have said definitely 29er HT ....until I saw those rooty sections. But everyone is different. 

Probably been said, but a 27.5+ is generally a heavy bike so factor that in.


----------



## Battery (May 7, 2016)

I love my 29er trail hardtail. I think you should ride both types of wheels and see what you like the most.

When it comes to maintenance costs, FS bikes, in general, will be quite a bit more regardless of the wheel size.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Harold said:


> I think I said that.


I guess I don't see the point about improving control through 'chattery bumps' at low speed...except for climbing.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

jeremy3220 said:


> I guess I don't see the point about improving control through 'chattery bumps' at low speed...except for climbing.


Nobody else is you, and everybody has their own preferences. It is not for you or I to presume what others might like. Some might agree with you, but may not.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mike_biker (Sep 23, 2018)

> lucifuge
> I would have said definitely 29er HT ....until I saw those rooty sections. But everyone is different.
> 
> Probably been said, but a 27.5+ is generally a heavy bike so factor that in.





> Harold
> Nobody else is you, and everybody has their own preferences. It is not for you or I to presume what others might like. Some might agree with you, but may not.





> Battery
> I love my 29er trail hardtail. I think you should ride both types of wheels and see what you like the most.


As I see and understand all of your replies I can't really make a wrong decision picking 27.5"+ or 29" bike.

I am considering taking 27.5"+ only because those rooty sections. But on the other hand there will be only a small percentage of those rooty trails, maybe about 5%. For most other routes, 29" should be fine, I guess?


----------



## lucifuge (Jul 1, 2011)

Mike_biker said:


> As I see and understand all of your replies I can't really make a wrong decision picking 27.5"+ or 29" bike.
> 
> I am considering taking 27.5"+ only because those rooty sections. But on the other hand there will be only a small percentage of those rooty trails, maybe about 5%. For most other routes, 29" should be fine, I guess?


Absolutely fine.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

You can make the Alma fine for the rocky/rooty sections too.
The main things holding it back are the 23mm inner width rims.

The Alma is a 29 with Boost 148 rear hub spacing. The Alma has 23mm inner rims. Those are really road tire skinny rims. Less sidewall support for mt bike tires. 
These days 30mm is the minimum I'd recommend. 
With wide rims/tires you can handle those roots. But not the best with the Alma without upgrading to wider rims. The rear allows 2.4" tires.-
It does have a Boost fork and 15x110 front hub. You could run a 40mm inner front rim wheel with a Bontrager XR2 Team 2.6 tire.
Next best would be a 35mm inner rim with a XR2 Team 2.35.
It'll take a 2.4 rear tire- get a XR2 Team 2.35 on a 35mm inner rim wheel. 

These tires are designed specifically for wide rims.
That combo at lower pressures will give you the best performance out of that bike on trails. 
Close enough to 27.5+.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Mike_biker said:


> I am considering taking 27.5"+ only because those rooty sections. But on the other hand there will be only a small percentage of those rooty trails, maybe about 5%. For most other routes, 29" should be fine, I guess?


Even on those rooty sections the 29" will be totally fine.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Not everyone only wants to go as fast as possible hoping over all the great trail features instead of riding on them, some like to slow it down, use their skills and actually pilot the bike through rough technical sections instead of jumping/hoping them. Some people like slow-medium speed, very tech trails where plus really shines, it's all personal preference, don't mind the "I must go as fast as possible, roost berms and destroy trail" crowd, get out and test ride some bikes and if you're older, plus makes more sense again.

I'm not limit by 1 bike, I have several and on my FS bikes I ride faster, I won't run anything above 2.4" because I already have the suspension doing alot of work, having bigger, stickier tyres would just make it like riding down the trail in a Caddy not having to do any work. On my HT I run 2.8" B+ tyres on i35 rims which I ride slower than the FS, and have to deal with the hard rear, on my rigid I run 29x3" F&R on i39 rims because you just can't (or at least I can't now) ride nearly as fast as my FS and the extra cush/suspension the 3" tyres provides helps to deal with all that rough stuff like in your photos.



Mike_biker said:


> As I see and understand all of your replies I can't really make a wrong decision picking 27.5"+ or 29" bike.
> 
> I am considering taking 27.5"+ only because those rooty sections. But on the other hand there will be only a small percentage of those rooty trails, maybe about 5%. For most other routes, 29" should be fine, I guess?


----------



## ThatGuyontheTrail (Sep 22, 2018)

I'd buy 27.5+ just because I've had two 29rs. But that's me. I'd probably have gotten that instead of my fat bike based on how I ride the fat bike now.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

You could also get a bike that fits both wheel sizes.


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

jeremy3220 said:


> You could also get a bike that fits both wheel sizes.


I resemble that remark 

27.5 PLUS bikes take 29er wheels`n`tires.
PLUS also gives you 'Boost Spacing' for far stiffer wheel sets,
Thats stiffer with lighter parts because of the wider spoke angles..
It's a Plus,, no pun Intended :`D

My stock $400 Boost wheels feel like my old $1,000 American Classic Non boost wheel set.

Make sure your plus bike is of the newer slacker Geo and with rims at 35 mm ID you can run 2.6 wides for a bit more precision without building a 29er wheel set.

If your not racing don't limit your tire/wheel choices with an old school 29er..
Plus means more, ++++++









My 2.8 wides, tubeless at 15 psi Oh my~~~

ok Ok so not as fast as a light race worthy 29er but hey my Slack Plus tired Hard tail handles great and feel plenty efficient.
I feel hard tail efficiency without the 29er hard tail harsh ride..

27.5+ tires are almost as tall as 29ers and get this height with taller sidewalls. Good tires can be had at or near 800 grams up to super tuff 1100 grams hoops.

That taller side wall when tubeless and at optimum pressure for you and your trails is like having 30-50 mm of rear suspension travel.

The right tires for YOUR rides is critical and tubes will destroy a plus tire bikes handling by adding weight where It hurts the bike the most.
Plus tubes are often 200 plus grams each.
Sealant for my 27.5x2.8's was 2 oz or 60 grams,, do the math.

OP, your photo's,, IMHO not one of those trail conditions would need a plus tire but most ALL of those trail conditions would be more fun and or less of a body beating on a plus bike.

Think of it this way for a sec,
A 29er hard tail in race trim at 20 pounds would be far faster and demand you to be precise and on the edge picking the better lines, great fun Indeed.

A plus bike will let you RELAX a little and have some fun on the crappy lines,
Will let you make more mistakes with less drama,
Will beat you a little less,, No a bunch less!

A narley spot on a 29er, 'Oh crap', gotta get this right !,,, Ah I nailed it !

A narley spot on a plus bike, 'Wow that was easy', I think I'll get loose and see whats next !


----------



## richj8990 (Apr 4, 2017)

I'm not even going to read your post, just the title, get a 27.5+!!! And if you don't like the tires then you can still put standard 29" in anyway.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

I have ridden the same bike in 27.5+ and 29er. Same exact frame and fork. I liked it better 2.35f and 2.2 rear on 21mm inner widths wheels compared to 2.8 front/rear on 35mm inner width wheels. 


The 27.5+ was sort of plush, but not fast and snappy. I preferred the fast and snappy more lively feel of 29. Also 29ers roll over root better. The 27.5+ will absorb, but not roll over as well. This purely a diameter thing. I have friend with a 27.5+ Specialized Fuze. He just picked up a set of 29er wheels to convert it. I ride in place with lots of rocks and rocky trails. I still like 29er over the 27.5+. I might try 29+ one day on my singlespeed because they will fit, but I am not sure I want to deal with extra drag and weight. I plenty of friends that ride 29+ HT or 29HT, but very few who ride 27.5+ HT.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

eb1888 said:


> ...
> The main things holding it back are the 23mm inner width rims.
> 
> .... has 23mm inner rims. Those are really road tire skin..could run a 40mm inner front rim wheel with a Bontrager XR2 Team 2.6 tire.
> ...


23mm internal width wheels are fine. No need to go any wider. 2.35's work perfect on 21-25mm wheels. I run 2.35 on both 21mm and 24mm wide wheels and 2.2 XR3 or XR2 on 21mm and 24mm wheels. I have set of 35mm wheels with 2.6's on them. I think that is the narrowest tire size that I would put on 35mm wheels. The sidewalls are already pretty stretched out and not all that protected from rocks and cuts. I don't run 2.8 on that bike since the frame will not fit them. The 2.6 are already over the factory limit for width, but they work. I was trying to get larger diameter on 27.5 wheels to get a more like a 29er roll over. Putting a 2.35 on 35mm however wheels is asking for a cut sidewall.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

There are no ideal bike, it depends on our weight, where we ride, what we enjoy.
You can buy a used bike and sell it 3 months later if you do not enjoy it.
In my opînion the hardtail 29 in is a great do it all bike.
I tried a 27+ and the drag, slower accelerations takes some fun out for me.
I enjoy a fatbike but only for 4 months on the snow.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

JoePAz said:


> 23mm internal width wheels are fine. No need to go any wider. 2.35's work perfect on 21-25mm wheels. I run 2.35 on both 21mm and 24mm wide wheels and 2.2 XR3 or XR2 on 21mm and 24mm wheels. I have set of 35mm wheels with 2.6's on them. I think that is the narrowest tire size that I would put on 35mm wheels. The sidewalls are already pretty stretched out and not all that protected from rocks and cuts. I don't run 2.8 on that bike since the frame will not fit them. The 2.6 are already over the factory limit for width, but they work. I was trying to get larger diameter on 27.5 wheels to get a more like a 29er roll over. Putting a 2.35 on 35mm however wheels is asking for a cut sidewall.


You're *a lot *better rider than I am. 
There's no way I feel confident blasting down the rocky Arizona trails you have thousands of miles of experience on using 2.2 rear and 2.35 front XRs on 23mm or so rims. I've tried that and crash more. 
I need the wider rims and lower pressure to slow down how fast the tire slides out. 
I need to have time to recover from the mistakes I make and correct my line. 
I need a 30mm rim for a XR2 2.2. 
I want a 35mm for the 2.35. because I have to run lower pressures to give me a bigger footprint for more control even if I'm a little slower than you. 
I'd be happy to be just a little slower but that ain't happening. . . .until the OP gets much better I think he'll be safer and happier on wider rims if he goes 29. 
I am. I think the OP is more like me.
Mikesee runs XR2 2.6s on 40mm.in Park City. He had that width already.
The problem is the cost of different width wheels makes it impossible for normal riders to experiment and get the experience to know what width rim is best for them.


----------



## Grodyman (Sep 29, 2016)

In your situation I would get a Santa Cruz Blur, Giant Anthem, or any other ultralight carbon xc full suspension rig, and keep the thinner 29er tires. Keep the speed, and the comfort.
Gman


----------



## gat3keeper (Jan 24, 2015)

My colleague bought a Kona Big Honzo with 2.8 tires I think. I was surprised how light the bike is, how well it rolls, ride feel is very good. I'm not sure if it's the wheel/tires or the overall geometry and components that makes the honzo so good to ride.

Haven't tried any other brand with 27.5 plus but I will definitely buy an HT 27.5+ mtb if my budget will allow.


----------

