bfloyd

Which is better for climbing. 26 in. or 29 in. rear? I'm thinking maybe 26 in.???

Pigtire

If you are talking about wheel/tire size then I have no issue climbing w/ this. The rear is actually more of a 28.

Little Leo

I think he is thinking 29er vs. 26er. What I've heard is they roll better because of the bigger tire. If it rolls better is has to be better!

ed 

I can only regurgitate the information that I obtained from MBActions 26'er vs 29'er shootout.

The summary basically stated that races are won on the hills and the 26'er outclimbs the 29er hands down.

Dannihilator

That's mtbaction though, they also reccomended some guy with a stumpjumper fsr a few years back to get a double crown fork.

ed 

Here's what I wrote when I read the article:

I'm starting this thread to announce that there was a head-to-head 26'er vs. 29'er test done in the June issue of MBAction that I just downloaded.

Overall the 26'er won, but the 29'er had it's high points:

Both bikes were identical with the exception of the wheel size and fork size. For the 29" bike, they used a Gary Fisher Paragon 29'er and for it's competition built a same spec 26'er Paragon, using the HKEK frame which is the same only built around the 26" geometry. They tested them side-by-side.

29'er--26'er
Weight-26.6 lbs---25.6 lbs
Mud-26'er-Winner (29'er slower rotation packs up faster)
Overall Feel-Slower, but in a fun way---Quick, whippy, and responsive
Bumps--29'er winner by a long shot ---------
Quick/ tight Turning-- 26'er-winner (29'er cuts larger arcs)
Accelerating -Slow and Sluggish--- Winner hands down
Sprinting - Winner (already moving fast, feels natural) --- Quirky/lagging
Seated climbing - Can't get over the wheel weight --- Winner
Standing Climb -29'er has 1" longer stays / can't get weight over rear ---26'er wins
Braking - 29'er Winner ----------
Jumping - 29'er Winner more stable in the air/more control/feels more fun)
1/10mi accel. - 28.7sec --- 26.8sec
1/4mi hill climb - 31sec --- 26.6sec
1-1/4mi XC - 9min 16sec --- 8min 57sec
1/10mi DH coast - 29.6 --- 29.8

Overall for XC, the 26'er was their preference. They liked the 29er for rough terrain, obviously. They also liked it for very tall people or purist types who hate suspension bikes.

Quote:

"The 29'er makes you feel invincible over bumps & walks all over the 26'er at speed. The Paragon 29'er will never climb or accelerate as well as the 'Paragon 26'er'. Mountain bike races are won on hills. (usually climbing them)"

Little Leo

very interesting... I am getting a Fisher Cobia if it ever gets here.

Brian

26 in the back, 29 up front. It's the new black.

Dannihilator

That quote right there proves my point that the people at mtb action are morons. A bike with smaller wheels is hands down easier to maneuver and stable in the air than a 29er ever will be.

Little Leo

So what is a 29er good for? I am starting to think I should have gotten a 26er for XC racing.

It is still not to late to change my mind, Gary Fisher has not had a Cobia for 3 weeks, Im not liking them too much right now.

Az B

Holy crap! My van isn't much faster than that on a flat 1/4 mile!

Az

mlts22 

I wonder if 29" bikes will be around, or they will be a flash in the pan type of thing, like Biopace chainrings or geared bottom brackers. 26" stuff (forks, etc) is common and easy to find, while some shops may have to special order 29" stuff.

wethepeople

I cant wait till they come out with 24/20 .

ed 

I could see the 26" easier to maneuver, but stable...maybe they're talking about the gyro properties of the larger wheels giving the bike more of a stable feel in the air.

I feel more stable in the air on a heavier bike than a light bike. I feel more stable in the air on a Motocross bike than a bicycle.

I don't feel as maneuverable on either though. Stability and maneuverability don't go hand in hand.

probable556

Sweet bike- the rigid fork has climbing written all over it.

Dannihilator

The gyroscopic forces on a 29er compared to those produced by a 26, 24,20 are really moot, a 29er wheel goes at a slower rpm than a 26, just like 24 is higher than the 26 and the 20 is higher than the 24. A 26" wheel producing a higher rpm will equal the same gyroscopic effect as a 29er at a slower rpm.

Brian

I can offer you one better.

Pigtire

MBA mag,hmmmm. I would probably stop building my second 29er because of their findings.Hmmmm... Really, I chose a 29er based on the type of riding I do w/c is 7 road miles to the trail and a long fireroad climb( and a sweet fireroad descent) and to me the 29er is perfect for that(It just keeps on rolling). If you think 29ers has a slow rate of accelaration then imagine this ride(pictured below) but it did not stop me from getting one(again based on the type of riding). Just pick the bike that's best for the type of riding you do.

Pigtire

Thanks my friend.

Frunkin

i have biopace chainrings on a road bike i found
what are they

Bubbaslush

The elliptical chainring is supposed to give you better acceleration on the downstroke, I've heard its garbage though.
Here's a link https://www.sheldonbrown.com/biopace.html

Brian

They're a unique way to make bad knees worse.

ed 

I guess I could see that...I guess the only real way to do it would be to try both first hand. Still...you get someones else's opinion which is always weighted one way or the other.

willtsmith_nwi

Trust a bunch of 26er people to bash 29ers having never ridden one. Actually this segues quite nicely into the MBAction article. They grabbed a guy who had not ridden 29ers before. They did not modify the gears.

Every unaware person who hops on a 29er comments "DA RARE END DONT AXELERATE NO GOOD". To which we promptly have to CONSTANTLY explain that larger diameter wheel effectively change the gearing ration. Upshift one gear and see how your bike "accelerates". The physics bare the entire situation out as the radius drops out of the equation.

So what you're left with is a slightly bigger, slightly heavier wheel. The bigger wheel does not drop into wholes so easily. They go over roots better. The greater rubber volume "melds" to the trail surface better. People who like 29ers like them for their climbing abilities.

So yes, 29ers are better for climbing. And Mountain Bike Action is better for kindling once you get done looking at all the pictures.

BTW: If you want your 29er question asked by people who have actually ridden 29ers and 26er extensively, go here https://forums.mtbr.com/forumdisplay.php?f=61.

Thor29

Not changing the gearing was a pretty big mistake if MBA was really trying to compare the bikes. But then, I don't trust MBA to be very accurate or open minded.

When I first heard of the concept, I was pretty skeptical. In fact, I scoffed at the idea. Harumph. After awhile it started to seem like it might actually make sense. So I built a 29er (Voodoo Dambala). That particular bike had some problems, but the 29er thing was great. So I swapped frames to a Niner SIR. I wouldn't trade my Niner for ANY bike, it's that good. It's fast, stable, and it handles perfectly. I can thread the tightest trees with ease and blast down the trails at extreme speed. Any lack of acceleration is made up for by a lack of deceleration.

Here's a little comparison -
29ers carve, 26ers wiggle
29ers are stable, 26ers are squirrelly
29ers are smooth, 26ers are bouncy
29ers flow, 26ers stop and go

Okay, okay, enough of the 29er madness. What's the downside? Still not enough choices in forks. If you are a weight weenie, a 26er can be built lighter (but a 20er can be built lighter still). That's about it. Don't knock it till you try it.