Originally Posted by seely
Since the diameter of the wheel is smaller on a 650 (26") vs. a 700c (29") you are going to have to pedal more to cover the same distance. I don't know the specifics on measurements but the 700c covers X amount of ground in a given revolution and the 650 covers less distance because of the smaller overall diameter. I steer people away from 650s typically but on a small frame its the only option that makes sense. Its good for smaller riders too, because the smaller wheel accelerates faster for those with less mass.
Hello! There's truth in what you say but not nearly enough to make your statement true. Maybe you should give politics a try.
My bike has a whole gob of gears. Whenever I find that I'm having to spin too fast, I just access the next faster one. That's what everybody else does too. The only times that your argument has any validity is when you are sprinting downhill in your very fastest gear and possibly in some pack raceing situations.
The things that affect how fast you can go on your bike are the power of the motor and the various resistance factors that are holding you back. For any one rider, the power that you can produce is essentially fixed. Of the factors that hold you back, aero resistance, once you get past about 15mph is so great that everything else fades into the background. On hills, weight becomes an issue but, oh yeah, 650 wheels and tires will weigh less won't they? Actually, I could make an argument that the shorter top tube and better frame geometry that is made possible by the 650c wheel will allow a shorter rider to both produce more power because she's more efficient and be more aero because the bike fits her better.