What's the point of 27.5" ?

[P-Jay]

Personally, I think it's pointless other than as a marketing tool, it means we, as riders, are being enticed to whole new standard, as standard that makes current frames, forks and of course wheels obsolete.

I mean it's not even bloody 27.5" it's 27.1" a whole inch and a bit bigger than every mountain bike since the dawn of time, well aside from 29ers of course.

But I try to be open minded, any PH'ers have a 650B yet, obviously you like it, or you wouldn't have bought it, but is it the 650 thing that makes it good?

Follows on my rants in here:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[Jimbo.]

There is no point. It's absolute ste trotted out by desperate marketing departments. The whole "Lighter! Stiffer! Faster! Bold! New! Graphics!" is what pisses me off most in cycling.

That, and Singletrackworld types who bore the tits off me.

[BaronVonVaderham]

No point other than to sell more bikes.

Mountain biking media/magazines/websites are the epitomy of 'you can't do that unless you have this!'

[P-Jay]

I honestly think it goes deeper than that, I know from first-hand experience (although not bike related) the sorts of st PR / Marketing depts. dish out to reviewers for favourable reviews, that's the only reason why I can explain why they're falling over each other to say this new wheel size is some sort revelation.

The argument seems to be:

Punters: We don't want 650B, we like 26"

Bike Co: Why are you so bothered, don't worry it doesn't make much difference.

Punters: So why do I have to change EVERYTHING and why are you so hell bent on killing off 26"

Bike Co: It's a REVOLATION!

Punters: er....

Bike Co: Well... it depends on your specific complaint about spending thousands of pounds with us, pick which makes you feel happier.

Unhappy Punter: I bought some 2011 Fox 35's for £800 with a 1.5" steerer, now they're useless because all your frames are tapered.

Bike Co: Oh that wasn't our fault, erm, we won't do that again.

Unhappy Punter 2: My XTR 9sp shifter has broken, can I have a replacement.

Bike Co: 9Sp causes 'bad aids'.

Happy Punter: I've got a really sweet 10 x 2 set up, it's perfect! love it, thanks!

Bike Co: Yuk, 10sp, do you have bad aids yet? Here's some 11sp stuff, £800 please.

[joema]

You won't like this but.... I tried one and it was pretty good!

The bike was a tad lighter but it was effortless to keep speed.... It floated and felt stable even though the bike was not set up and had a steeper head angle than my bike.

I dare say my next bike will be one. Not convinced with 29 wheels and their strength.

[JayHeal]

Yeah it's just marketing crap to get you to buy a new bike, because they are trying to make 26 old and trying to say 27.5 is so much better!!!

[yellowjack]

joema said:

You won't like this but.... I tried one and it was pretty good!

The bike was a tad lighter but it was effortless to keep speed.... It floated and felt stable even though the bike was not set up and had a steeper head angle than my bike.

I dare say my next bike will be one. Not convinced with 29 wheels and their strength.

I saw a Merida 650B bike in Farnborough a couple of weeks ago, and thought it looked nice. I'll be in the market for a new MTB at some point, and as none of the components on the old entry-level GT Avalanche I currently have are worthy of transferring over, I won't mind too much about compatibility issues. I too was never convinced by the 29ers, especially the evangelical way they are often sold as the solution to every problem you never knew you had. I was also troubled because I'm a short-arse, and the aesthetics of every 29er I've seen have been awful. The 650B wheel size seems (for me, anyway) to address those issues. Otherwise, I'd be happy to stick with 26 inch wheels, but if the market goes with 650B it wouldn't break my heart.

One thing, though. I wish bike shops would stop bloody lying to me. I went into a shop in Reading when I was there for the Festival, because a £3,000 full suspension Merida caught my eye. The owner came over, and, as the Merida was way over my budget, I asked about the 650B bikes and whether he had any upstairs. He replied that they "haven't been released yet", at which point I looked for the way out. Bear in mind, I'd seen one, albeit in too large a frame size for me, in Farnbourough a few weeks previous. Make up your minds guys - either I saw/swung a leg over one at the beginning of August in a local shop, or they haven't been released yet - it really cannot be both. If you simply haven't ordered, or received yours yet, tell me exactly that, or tell me that you don't like them and wouldn't stock them if your life depended upon it, just don't flannel me - like most serious bike buyers, I'm likely to have done a little homework on the type of bike I'm looking to buy. Potential sale lost there, fella. Sorry, but I simply won't deal with someone who doesn't appear to a) tell me the truth or b) doesn't know the release dates for new models from a manufacturer whose products he stocks

[DrMekon]

My LBS (Trek / Ghost / Marin / Whyte stockist) has a few of them in in small people sizes. In that I require farm gate sized bikes, 29ers look good to me. However, having only ridden a steel Niner, which felt horrible, I'll need a few test rides if I'm going to be persuaded to move away from 26".

27.5 is 650B, which is the classic French rando bike size - some people get very animated about touring constructeur bikes with 650Bx50mm tyres - CF Jan Heine - http://janheine.wordpress.com/2011/02/01/a-journey...

[james0]

Only tried a 29er and it felt pretty good but it was a new bike and everything was working properly and an all round lighter bike than mine as I build mine up pretty heavy.
Being as a smaller wheelset and tyres of the same spec will be lighter I really cant see the point of increasing the unsprung weight for such a small difference in rolling radius with 650b.
I do get the point of the 29ers but wonder what the handling will be like with heavier setups that I prefer to run (95kg fairly agressive rider).

In the short term I think the two new standards will effect new bike sales as many will worry they will be stuck with a Betamax wheel size.

[Rouleur]

Fizik have brought out 27.5" and 29" specific saddles

[james0]

Rouleur said:

Fizik have brought out 27.5" and 29" specific saddles

Sums it all up really.

[dave_s13]

Well I went from a slightly old and clunky 2008 Specialised Rockhopper comp disc 26" (29er, 650b weren't on my radar then) to a Scott Scale Elite 29er earlier in the year.

The 29ers suit me perfectly as I'm tall so they look right with me sat on them. It's massively faster everywhere and so far I've had no issues with the wheels exploding or anything. The only thing I don't like about the bike it it's so damn stiff, it rattles your teeth out on rough ground, that's would be the same on 26" wheels though.

I'm not convinced that 650b is anything other than marketing and a way for the cycle industry to stimulate it's economy. I am convinced that 29ers are faster than 26ers though - assuming all things are equal.

[P-Jay]

joema said:

You won't like this but.... I tried one and it was pretty good!

The bike was a tad lighter but it was effortless to keep speed.... It floated and felt stable even though the bike was not set up and had a steeper head angle than my bike.

I dare say my next bike will be one. Not convinced with 29 wheels and their strength.

No not at all, if there's an advantage, fair enough, I'd rather they continued offering a 26" option for all of us to try, but if it really does make a difference I can live with it, I'm still not convinced though, I'd need to try two otherwise identical brand new bikes side by side before I made the chance and effectively binned all my spares.

[bobbo89]

I've never really been bothered for 27.5 or 29'ers but i read this article the other day and noticed the bit from Syntace.

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Eurobike-2013-Good-Ba...

I'd like to read a bit more into it but if there is a genuine advantage to running different sized wheels front and rear depending on your height, then i could be persuaded.

[Fluffsri]

bobbo89 said:

I've never really been bothered for 27.5 or 29'ers but i read this article the other day and noticed the bit from Syntace.

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Eurobike-2013-Good-Ba...

I'd like to read a bit more into it but if there is a genuine advantage to running different sized wheels front and rear depending on your height, then i could be persuaded.

Im a short arse and when I sat on my mates M Canyon 29er I look like a kid on his dads bike. If I was to move to a bigger wheel then a 27.5 would suit me better.

Just been out on a lunchtime ride and we started chatting about this thread. We came up with the larger wheels will be better on some terain but not so good on others, if a group of you are out riding say 5 with 26" and 1 with 29 and 1 with 27.5 and you happen on several punctures you cant just swap inner tubes over, no matter how much all the mags/forums etc say how great a different wheelset is, its only going to bw as good as the rider and tbh we reckon the average rider wont be able to notice the difference.


I organise an annual ride in the Purbecks in August. My mate had his Canyon 29er, I will add this is a bloody nice bike, at the lunch stop we asked him if he was enjoying it and has it made a difference? His answer was " I'm not fast enough downhill to really notice anything different and its no easier to push it up the hills"

I have looked at buying into 29er and love some of the new 27.5s but for now Ill stick with my trusty (newly refurbed) 26" bouncer

[dave_s13]

Fluffsri said:

bobbo89 said:

I've never really been bothered for 27.5 or 29'ers but i read this article the other day and noticed the bit from Syntace.

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Eurobike-2013-Good-Ba...

I'd like to read a bit more into it but if there is a genuine advantage to running different sized wheels front and rear depending on your height, then i could be persuaded.

Im a short arse and when I sat on my mates M Canyon 29er I look like a kid on his dads bike. If I was to move to a bigger wheel then a 27.5 would suit me better.

Just been out on a lunchtime ride and we started chatting about this thread. We came up with the larger wheels will be better on some terain but not so good on others, if a group of you are out riding say 5 with 26" and 1 with 29 and 1 with 27.5 and you happen on several punctures you cant just swap inner tubes over, no matter how much all the mags/forums etc say how great a different wheelset is, its only going to bw as good as the rider and tbh we reckon the average rider wont be able to notice the difference.


I organise an annual ride in the Purbecks in August. My mate had his Canyon 29er, I will add this is a bloody nice bike, at the lunch stop we asked him if he was enjoying it and has it made a difference? His answer was " I'm not fast enough downhill to really notice anything different and its no easier to push it up the hills"

I have looked at buying into 29er and love some of the new 27.5s but for now Ill stick with my trusty (newly refurbed) 26" bouncer

I noticed a massive difference when switching from 26 to 29 but this is purely on XC type riding.

I don't do any "proper" downhill stuff as such and for this I can't see how the bigger wheel would help on a FS DH bike.

Horses for courses I suppose, another excuse to suport the N+1 theory of how many bikes you should own

[Fluffsri]

dave_s13 said:

Fluffsri said:

bobbo89 said:

I've never really been bothered for 27.5 or 29'ers but i read this article the other day and noticed the bit from Syntace.

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/Eurobike-2013-Good-Ba...

I'd like to read a bit more into it but if there is a genuine advantage to running different sized wheels front and rear depending on your height, then i could be persuaded.

Im a short arse and when I sat on my mates M Canyon 29er I look like a kid on his dads bike. If I was to move to a bigger wheel then a 27.5 would suit me better.

Just been out on a lunchtime ride and we started chatting about this thread. We came up with the larger wheels will be better on some terain but not so good on others, if a group of you are out riding say 5 with 26" and 1 with 29 and 1 with 27.5 and you happen on several punctures you cant just swap inner tubes over, no matter how much all the mags/forums etc say how great a different wheelset is, its only going to bw as good as the rider and tbh we reckon the average rider wont be able to notice the difference.


I organise an annual ride in the Purbecks in August. My mate had his Canyon 29er, I will add this is a bloody nice bike, at the lunch stop we asked him if he was enjoying it and has it made a difference? His answer was " I'm not fast enough downhill to really notice anything different and its no easier to push it up the hills"

I have looked at buying into 29er and love some of the new 27.5s but for now Ill stick with my trusty (newly refurbed) 26" bouncer

I noticed a massive difference when switching from 26 to 29 but this is purely on XC type riding.

I don't do any "proper" downhill stuff as such and for this I can't see how the bigger wheel would help on a FS DH bike.

Horses for courses I suppose, another excuse to suport the N+1 theory of how many bikes you should own

Dave, what did you notice? I ride my cross bike (700c/29er) on the same trails as my bouncer(26) and the only difference to me is my arse and shoulders hurt on the CX bike and dont on the bouncer. I realise they are completely different bikes but if I put 26 on the CX I dont thik it would be that noticable, PS not having a dig just interested.

[dave_s13]

Fluffsri said:

Dave, what did you notice? I ride my cross bike (700c/29er) on the same trails as my bouncer(26) and the only difference to me is my arse and shoulders hurt on the CX bike and dont on the bouncer. I realise they are completely different bikes but if I put 26 on the CX I dont thik it would be that noticable, PS not having a dig just interested.

Just hugely faster everywhere and able to keep up (well almost) with a mate who was always destroying me on our rides out.

BUT...there is also the fact that I went from a 2008 Rockhopper to a new Scott that is twice the price and only weighs 11.5kg....that'll have something to do with it too I suppose

I' am 6'4" though and the bike seems to fit me just right. The main thing is I love riding the bike, it feels lovely and I can go fast on it (for me anyway).

[Fluffsri]

dave_s13 said:

Just hugely faster everywhere and able to keep up (well almost) with a mate who was always destroying me on our rides out.

BUT...there is also the fact that I went from a 2008 Rockhopper to a new Scott that is twice the price and only weighs 11.5kg....that'll have something to do with it too I suppose

I' am 6'4" though and the bike seems to fit me just right. The main thing is I love riding the bike, it feels lovely and I can go fast on it (for me anyway).

I bet you dont look like your riding the wrong bike at 6,4! Cheers for the reply.

[Mr E]

Jimbo. said:

There is no point. It's absolute ste trotted out by desperate marketing departments. The whole "Lighter! Stiffer! Faster! Bold! New! Graphics!" is what pisses me off most in cycling.

I ride a steel hardtail. With 26" wheels.
The marketing boys must hate me.