Mountain Biking - 29'' wheels whats that?

i saw an ad in one of my mags that the gary fischer sugar's are going to 29'' wheels. what do you think about that? do you think its a good idea?

For certain courses it would be faster but the larger wheels don't accelerate as fast, turn as fast and have a higher cg. On the other hand, once they get going, they are awesome-- really fast.

It's a good thing. The more ideas and choices, the better. This isn't some hairbrained idea but something that alot of companies are testing out.

ITs a good idea...but not for everyone. Personally I will probably end up running a 26-24 combo on my bike in the future because of the riding I do.

MY Uncle would probably be better off with a 29" setup.

Seriously,

I think a 29", 26" DH bike would be a sweet option for some really fast courses. More options never hurt.

Isnt 29" just a 700C rim with a fat tyre on, or am I missing something.
What is the difference between a 29"MTB wheel and a touring bike (36 to 40 spoke) wheel ?

Originally posted by MichaelW
Isnt 29" just a 700C rim with a fat tyre on, or am I missing something.
What is the difference between a 29"MTB wheel and a touring bike (36 to 40 spoke) wheel ? Yes, a 29er uses a 700c rim. The 29 designation comes from the overall measurement of the wheel with the tire on (though approximate). 29ers themselves are designed to accomodate big, wide MTB tires and use MTB geometry as opposed to touring geometry.

Personally I think it's a lame idea. Higher center of gravity, slower acceleration, sluggish cornering, not to mention there are very few tires and parts made for 29 inch.

I like the 29'er. I rode one in a race when my FSR was broken and it kicked ass on that course. Granted it was probably the best course for that bike with just tid bits of singletrack that bike kicked ass. It beat me all to hell b/c i'm used to the FSR but man that thing was fast!!!!! I'd like to try it out on some tighter courses but if i could have 2 bikes a 29'er would definately be the second one mainly b/c it suits almost all of the trails we have here in MI and once they get going it feels like you're floating vs pedaling in a 26"

for racing where u are likely to have all you rneeded parts this may well be a good thing, but in the world where most of us ride and get flats al the time there is no way i would use something i can't run down to the local bike shop and get a new tube tire or rim when needed. then again my bike is not a toy its my transportation.

you know it sounds like one of the main reasons why alot of people here dont like the 29 incher is becuase you cant just run down to the lbs and get another tube or tire or rim, but it kinda sounds like they're getting more popular which would mean of course your lbs will start carrying them if everybody's comin in asking for 29 inch parts.

Originally posted by mountaindew
i saw an ad in one of my mags that the gary fischer sugar's are going to 29'' wheels.


Not only are they GOING to 29" wheels, customers already have them. There are many other companies that are making frames too. Marzocchi even made a fork specific to 29" wheels.

I vote 36" wheels! (http://www.coker.com/viewinventoryimage.asp?url=images/big/816.gif)

Personally I think 29'r will be a fluke when it comes to short track XC, DH, 4x, and the freeride set.

Short track-too cumbersome.

DH, 4x,Freeride- The larger the wheel, the harder it is to get off the ground.

Has anyone seen Surly's version of the 29er? It's called the Karate Monkey. According to their website, it is due in February.

I haven't ridden a 29er nor have I really heard anything solid about them. However, Surly is apparently dealing with some of the shortcomings of the 29er. They are curving the seat tube so the rear wheel can be more under the rider (shorter chainstays). In addition, they tweaked the geometry to prevent toe rub on the front wheel. The wheelbase for their bikes are not terribly long. I'm looking forward to hearing what people have to say about the Karate Monkey.

The sensible way would be to put 26" into S-M sized frames, 24" into Extra Small and 29" into L.

Bodging the geometry to fit a big wheel into a small frame is daft, but with big frames, you can use pretty standard geometries.
Conventional wisdom is to use the biggest wheels which will fit into your frame.

As far as centre of gravity goes, this is determined more by the bottom bracket height, and should be set according to the crank length, so big riders would be able to get pedal clearance using longer cranks. This is all a bit sophisticated for those poor old mass market bike builders.

Looking around town at what people ride, I see little old ladies on 700c hybrids and big, tall guys on tiny little 26" wheels.

Originally posted by MichaelW
The sensible way would be to put 26" into S-M sized frames, 24" into Extra Small and 29" into L.

Bodging the geometry to fit a big wheel into a small frame is daft, but with big frames, you can use pretty standard geometries.
Conventional wisdom is to use the biggest wheels which will fit into your frame.

As far as centre of gravity goes, this is determined more by the bottom bracket height, and should be set according to the crank length, so big riders would be able to get pedal clearance using longer cranks. This is all a bit sophisticated for those poor old mass market bike builders.

Looking around town at what people ride, I see little old ladies on 700c hybrids and big, tall guys on tiny little 26" wheels.

Different riding styles? I ride tight technical tracks that require sharp maneuvering and low centre of gravity. Heck I am even considering dropping to a 24 in rear wheel to further assist on technical tracks. I am also 6'5 and wouldn't even consider the large wheels. It isn't for everyone. If I was riding basic xc or commuting and looking for maximum speed while still using a mtb I would consider it. But not for any of the riding I do.