Mountain Biking - 26 vs 29

Ok, I've done a lot of searching on and off of BF and I have not gotten a good sampling of individual perspectives about who likes which size better and why. Please share your opinion on whether you prefer a 26 or a 29. Please keep in mind the type of riding you do with your post. Obviously they have their advantages and disadvantages based on terrain and style of riding.

I prefer a 26" wheeled bike. Not a xc rider.

I like 29" because 29 is the new 26.. plus its more new school, in a old school kind of way.

650b.

Just another 3" higher for me to fall...

I've only ever owned 26"ers, but I've demo'ed a couple of 29"ers. One of my favorite trails can actually be rocked quite nicer with a 29"er than with a regular MTB. If I don't buy a new road bike this year, I will probably build up a light rigid-forked, fat-tired, geared 29er. No way would I get rid of my 26" Stumpy hardtail. My other favorite trails are twisty and technical and I'm way too used doing them on 26' wheels. Old habits die hard.

Just another 3" higher for me to fall...

Unless you're standing on top of the wheel itself...then I'd suspect you mean 1 1/2" to fall.

ummm...both of you know that the bike frame itself isn't any higher up right?

The wheels are bigger but the seat isn't any higher than a 26'' bike. It isn't a panny farthing

That's Panty farthing.

29. Was riding a cheap 26 full suspension, got rid of it for a hardtail 29 and am riding much better - due to higher quality bike I'm sure. Downhill hiking trails, blazing new trails thru the woods and uphill climbs is what I've been doing so far. Next weekend is a trip to the downhill course at 7springs, should be interesting.

doh, just checked 7springs website - course doesn't open til May 23rd. So I have more time to practice locally before I go make a fool of myself in front of crowds....

650b.

+1 Prejudiced poll!

700c.

No love for 24's?

No love for 24's?Oh, yes:

http://www.feltbmx.com/09/store/images/large/8876.jpg

Ok, I've done a lot of searching on and off of BF and I have not gotten a good sampling of individual perspectives about who likes which size better and why.

You're kidding, right? You have not found any discussion on this issue?

Everybody and their monkey is riding 29'ers these days. I was riding a local swoopy, smooth, pedaly XC course the other day and noticed some really high dollar 29'ers rigid/suspended/geared/SS...all sorts. I rolled up to talk to one dude on a Badger custom steel rigid SS and it was like snob-city. Not a 29'er thing...just a yuppie punk thing.

So in my mind, I was like "Dude 29'ers are so unnecessary on this trail it's ridiculous." Then I looked down at my 31+lb 6" travel hardtail and giggled at my hypocrisy.

I've ridden Gary Fisher ExCal and Rig. I liked them both and thought for XC with a taller dude...sure man, why not? It's a bit smoother and ya got the momentum thing going for you. I have a hard enough time keeping my 26" wheels true. Maybe when I get older and more trail-timid...but for now 26" is good for me.

You're kidding, right? You have not found any discussion on this issue?

Apparently your perception of the English language is lacking. I said I hadn't found a satisfactory amount about a certain aspect of the issue. To be honest so far this thread isn't really helping either. I'm not looking for this one or that one, I want honest perspectives on WHY you like one better than the other and for what types of conditions. I've read a few articles and I can certainly appreciate a pros perspective, but to be quite frank I'm not a pro and neither are 99.999% of people who own mountain bikes. I want a retail customers opinion on what they enjoy riding more and why. If you can't understand that from my original post than you should get checked for a cognitive disability.

No love for 24's?

I'm sorry, I'd love to hear about your love for 24s or any other size wheel. Please share why you like them best.

I'm sorry, I'd love to hear about your love for 24s or any other size wheel. Please share why you like them best.

I was joking actually. I ride a 26. I've never ridden a 29er...too short to stand over it comfortably, but even if I was taller, I doubt I'd change over. I'd take having a nimble bike with shorter stays and a shorter wheelbase over being able to ride over things any day.

24's do have their merits for DJ's and cruisers though...

28er is my choice. That's a 700cx35 cyclocross set up with 29er suspension fork, really cool.

I was joking actually. I ride a 26. I've never ridden a 29er...too short to stand over it comfortably, but even if I was taller, I doubt I'd change over. I'd take having a nimble bike with shorter stays and a shorter wheelbase over being able to ride over things any day.

24's do have their merits for DJ's and cruisers though...

How tall are you? I rode a 16" 29er yesterday for kicks and had TONS of clearance on the compact frame and I'm only 5' 9".

28er is my choice. That's a 700cx35 cyclocross set up with 29er suspension fork, really cool.

Got any pics?

29er hardtails work well for our local trails. They are largely flowy singletrack with very long multi-thousand foot climbs and accordingly long and fast descents with smallish rock gardens, etc. Very little (read: not enough :( ) low speed tech stuff. Some people prefer 29ers for this sort of thing as well, but I am not one of them.

I feel like the larger wheel size is better for higher speed riding with small obstacles. Up to a certain level, the larger wheels will certainly help with technical riding by allowing the rider to hold a line well. I absolutely like them for technical climbs with lots of small ledges and rocks. Also, the larger rear wheel holds traction much more easily when standing and climbing, given otherwise identical tire width and tread.

I don’t notice much extra difficulty hopping/jumping the bike at speed.

I do not like the larger wheel for lower speed maneuvers due to the slightly increased input necessary to accelerate the bike, and it is much harder to manual the bike. There are lots of riders more skilled than me who do not find this an issue, but if this sort of riding is a top priority for you, and you aren’t very tall, I would think a 26er would be more appropriate.

Finally, of course, wheel size is just one factor when considering a bike. Even if a model has the “right” wheel size, it may be entirely wrong for your riding in other ways

how tall are you? I rode a 16" 29er yesterday for kicks and had tons of clearance on the compact frame and i'm only 5' 9".

5'3

Quick question, by manual, do you mean true manual, or a shorter (8-10 foot) manual required for a drop? No matter what I do, I cant hold a manual. I can get up to the point required for a manual, but I cant hold it. Guess I just need more practice.

5'3

I can see your point... I've never seen a 13/14" 29er. What a sight that would be. Wheels above the handle bars?

Part of the problem is the height of the bottom bracket...it's higher on a 29er, so the entire bike sits higher up. My 26ers are 15"'s (I think? Maybe 15.5"?), but the whole bike is lower to the ground. I have issues on longer travel bikes too...I went with a 4" XC bike after testing a 575, a Nomad, and an Enduro and realizing I didn't have the inseam to ride them (though I've heard the standover doesn't matter argument, I was pretty much sitting on the top tube and didn't feel comfortable on it). Hence the 24" burly bike lust...something that is small and flickable, and can take more punishment than the XC bike.

28er is my choice. That's a 700cx35 cyclocross set up with 29er suspension fork, really cool.

That's a way small tire. You mountain bike with those?

:deadhorse2:

I've ridden 26" wheels until this year when I bought a Kona Big Unit SS 29er. Being 6'6" I notice a big difference on XC trails.

I've ridden 26" wheels until this year when I bought a Kona Big Unit SS 29er. Being 6'6" I notice a big difference on XC trails.

What differences do you notice? Positive I'd assume, but please explain. I'd love to hear what differences you notice.

That's actually a big advantage for a 29er, it makes for a better fit if you are on the tall side.

Koop: The guy who told you to go back to school earlier on this thread was dead nuts on. You act like you've never heard of a 29er before. The last I looked, today's date was is the year 2009. You need to go back to about 2003 to find out why 29ers are popular/and or a viable alterntive to a 26" mountain bike. If you really have your panties in a bunch about what type of bike you should purchase, I would recommend you ride a unicycle.

Actually 29er's have been around before 2003. They date back to the 1980's/Early 1990's. They only became popular when Gary Fisher started to make them.

If you really have your panties in a bunch about what type of bike you should purchase, I would recommend you ride a unicycle.

A 29" unicycle?

Actually 29er's have been around before 2003. They date back to the 1980's/Early 1990's. They only became popular when Gary Fisher started to make them.
gary fisher steals someone else's good idea then thinks he invented it. i saw that turd at the durango film festival's premier of 'klunkerz'. he was talking about 29er's like he practically invented them. of course, he also considers himself a frame builder, though has never built a frame in his life!!

i've been riding a single speed on-one inbred 29er for a few years now. i really love the larger wheels! i've been riding it rigid, but just recently turned to the dark side and got a suspension fork. prior i was riding a rigid 26" single speed for a few years. i'm 6'4" and feel the larger wheeled frame is more suited to my height.

29er's work great here. most everyone i ride with is on a 29er or a 650b. we have tons of single track that can vary from fast and flowing to very rocky and tech. the rocks can vary from small to quite large. the surfaces can be hard packed, loose, super rocky, or sandstone... often times all in one trail! here in the pikes peak region, we also have LOTS of decomposed granite, which is also known as scree. basically it's like riding through several inches of pea gravel. not fun. i much prefer the 29 in the loose stuff; it feels much more stable. similar to M_S's description, we also have MANY, MANY several thousand feet elevation climbs and descents. it can be very steep here. there is one long "loop" i like do to here that is around 40 miles, but you easily gain 6,000 feet before the descent. most single speed folks are running around a 46" gear... which can be 32:20 on a 29; or 32:18 on a 26.

in my experience, i prefer the 29er in all conditions. riding each wheel size rigid is a night and day difference. i really felt beat up after a day of trail riding on my 26. the 29er just rolls over, up and down stuff much smoother. it makes tech riding easier. i notice i am much better at getting up tech stuff with the larger rear wheel following me. i have an easier time maintaining speed, due to how well the larger wheels roll over obstacles. i also prefer the longer wheelbase for maintaining traction up hill. however, the longer wheelbase can make low speed manuevers more challenging... especially sharp switchbacks, which i am terrible at. however, most my friends are much better at trail riding and don't have that complaint.

one complaint that people have with a 29er is that with the same gear inch, they accelerate slower than a 26. personally it doesn't bother me and i don't really notice. however, i think that is where a 650b shines. it accelerates more like a 26, but rolls over obstacles more like a 29. a 650b is more suited for all sizes of riders, where as a 29" wheel can be just too big for smaller bike frames. 29" wheels are also much more challenging to build a full suspension frame around. this is another area where a 650b can be superior.

I don't agree with the idea that "Gary steals someone else's good idea then thinks he invented it".

He was the first that I know of to actually offer a mass produced "blue collar" option to the masses. I applaud him for that. He's done a heck of alot for 29er recognition even if he is undeserving of the personal recognition. (this is why so many people associate the two) Who cares who's idea it was as long as it hits the masses in a more affordable package that the "mortal man" can afford instead of spending $2500 for a custom build.

Gary has done quite a bit for MTB'ing in general.

chelboed, you have good points. i do think he has had a good impact on mountain biking, but it seems like he likes to exaggerate. even in klunkerz, they talk about how tom ritchey made the first custom frame of their group and gary wanted one too, so he had tom make him one. now he thinks he's a frame builder!?

also, the way i understand it, gary stole his "genesis geometry" from doug bradbury.

mainly, i was just put off by gary's attitude in person. he seemed extremely arrogant. he really was talking about 29s like it was his idea, during a post film q and a session. i piped up that it was don mcclung to first request wtb to make him a 700c mountain bike tire and he squirmed, and then made some cocky joke about who knows who made one first, blah blah blah... when he probably knows damn well don mc clung and wes williams of willits were working on 29ers way before anyone. why couldn't he even give them a nod? humility would've clashed with his purple velvet trench coat.

i'm pretty certain the karate monkey was around before the gf rig. also, though not so "affordable", vicious cycles had a production 29 way before most companies did. ultimately, i don't care who was first and so on, but it also irks me when people don't give credit where it is due.

Part of the problem is the height of the bottom bracket...it's higher on a 29er, so the entire bike sits higher up. My 26ers are 15"'s (I think? Maybe 15.5"?), but the whole bike is lower to the ground. I have issues on longer travel bikes too...I went with a 4" XC bike after testing a 575, a Nomad, and an Enduro and realizing I didn't have the inseam to ride them (though I've heard the standover doesn't matter argument, I was pretty much sitting on the top tube and didn't feel comfortable on it). Hence the 24" burly bike lust...something that is small and flickable, and can take more punishment than the XC bike.

The wheel size has nothing to do with the bottom bracket height.

chelboed, you have good points. i do think he has had a good impact on mountain biking, but it seems like he likes to exaggerate. even in klunkerz, they talk about how tom ritchey made the first custom frame of their group and gary wanted one too, so he had tom make him one. now he thinks he's a frame builder!?

also, the way i understand it, gary stole his "genesis geometry" from doug bradbury.

mainly, i was just put off by gary's attitude in person. he seemed extremely arrogant. he really was talking about 29s like it was his idea, during a post film q and a session. i piped up that it was don mcclung to first request wtb to make him a 700c mountain bike tire and he squirmed, and then made some cocky joke about who knows who made one first, blah blah blah... when he probably knows damn well don mc clung and wes williams of willits were working on 29ers way before anyone. why couldn't he even give them a nod? humility would've clashed with his purple velvet trench coat.

i'm pretty certain the karate monkey was around before the gf rig. also, though not so "affordable", vicious cycles had a production 29 way before most companies did. ultimately, i don't care who was first and so on, but it also irks me when people don't give credit where it is due.

I feel ya. For some sad reason, it seems the super-successful are often arrogent. Not always...I'd hate to make that a blanket statement. I've always wanted to see Klunkerz b/c I'm worse than a bike geek. I think about it all the time. I love the history as long as it pertains to MTB's...can't say as I really give 2cents about road bike history...though I did enjoy watching "The Big Six" when I had the flu. And the Fisher/Kelly drama (though I don't recall the details) was unfortunate. It's pretty freakin' schwizzle to see reunion pic's of these guys rockin Repack.


Does he think he's a frame builder? If so, then yah...that may be a big fat farse. Though he could be brazing in his garage in his spare time...I dunno. I don't even know how much influence he has given toward his branded products. His marketing skills and ability to act on a vision at the apropriate time have been a good asset, I'd say. He may have had some oddball bike geek on his R&D team walk up to him and say "Hey man...I want to talk to you about something I'd like to call...Genesis geometry." and Gary may have just scooped it up and called it his idea. Where I work...all of my insight and credit goes to the main organization. I don't get any credit for it. And 29'ers being Gary's "idea" is definitely a load of brown poo. I'm just happy that somebody was able to bring the cost down. Heck man...when the Cobia came out, then everybody wanted a piece of action. They saw that it could be done affordably and that the market was there. Now there's a bottom feeder and a top notch 29'er from just about everyone.

I will say that your first hand knowledge of his piss-poor character traits have tainted my view of one of my favorite "cycling superstars". One of the situations that had previously lead me to think he was a laid back congenial hippy was when one of my local riding bud's was racing a pretty painful race. (AR, I believe) Said friend had used a dry lube for the dry conditions not knowing that there were a slew of creek crossings on the fairly long course causing his drivetrain to start the "squeaks". He got to a pedaly flat section and Gary pulled up beside him and with a surfer's accent said "Ya want some lube, dude?" My friend was like WHOAH! That's Gary Fisher! He was like "Nah...thanks though." They rode fairly close for a while until they got to the next winding singletrack and Gary threw the hammer down and dusted my friend. Pretty impressive when I think about how good of shape my friend was in at that time.

Hence my view of the man begins to plummet.

But back to the OP's Q...I still think that aggressive riding is more natural on a 26 over a 29. You can keep the wheelbase as short as possible w/o toe overlap. (which I don't see how anybody can ride a Med or Sm 29er frame w/o touching the front tire with their foot now and then. When I get to be an old Phart and my age outnumbers my inseam, and my bursts of power fade into bursts of flatulance, I'm almost certain I'll be riding some sort of short travel 29'er dually for XC stuff. For the most part in my region...it's a great place for them.

klunkerz is a must see. even if your only way to see it is to buy it, do it. it's really well done and really enjoyable.

I don't agree with the idea that "Gary steals someone else's good idea then thinks he invented it".

He was the first that I know of to actually offer a mass produced "blue collar" option to the masses. I applaud him for that. He's done a heck of alot for 29er recognition even if he is undeserving of the personal recognition. (this is why so many people associate the two) Who cares who's idea it was as long as it hits the masses in a more affordable package that the "mortal man" can afford instead of spending $2500 for a custom build.

Gary has done quite a bit for MTB'ing in general.

Gary Fisher is definitely more a marketing kind of guy and just might have an overinflated opinion of himself...
but he has done a lot of good for the sport (aside from the Montare frames :rolleyes:). I always crack up when I see how cool he tries to look (but like most older folk, it just doesn't come off so well).

(but like most older folk, it just doesn't come off so well).I've tried looking cool; but nobody with sit near me at bingo any more :mad:.

in my experience, i prefer the 29er in all conditions. riding each wheel size rigid is a night and day difference. i really felt beat up after a day of trail riding on my 26. the 29er just rolls over, up and down stuff much smoother. it makes tech riding easier. i notice i am much better at getting up tech stuff with the larger rear wheel following me. i have an easier time maintaining speed, due to how well the larger wheels roll over obstacles. i also prefer the longer wheelbase for maintaining traction up hill. however, the longer wheelbase can make low speed manuevers more challenging... especially sharp switchbacks, which i am terrible at. however, most my friends are much better at trail riding and don't have that complaint.

one complaint that people have with a 29er is that with the same gear inch, they accelerate slower than a 26. personally it doesn't bother me and i don't really notice. however, i think that is where a 650b shines. it accelerates more like a 26, but rolls over obstacles more like a 29. a 650b is more suited for all sizes of riders, where as a 29" wheel can be just too big for smaller bike frames. 29" wheels are also much more challenging to build a full suspension frame around. this is another area where a 650b can be superior.

As I've said, it's my personal preference towards 26" wheels due to riding style/discipline, but if I was to build a xc only bike up I might consider building a 29er if I can fin one that would feel right to me and my 30" inseam. So I may wind up waiting for other options for 650b stuff to come available until I make the switch.

As I've said, it's my personal preference towards 26" wheels due to riding style/discipline, but if I was to build a xc only bike up I might consider building a 29er if I can fin one that would feel right to me and my 30" inseam. So I may wind up waiting for other options for 650b stuff to come available until I make the switch.
a friend of mine just built up a 26" surly 1x1 with 650b wheels and disc brakes for his lady. it clears the tires! just a thought.

Positive I'd assume, but please explain. I'd love to hear what differences you notice.[/QUOTE]

The big frame fits me much better. The big wheels roll over obstacles much easy and I find the big wheels make for better handling.

Koop: The guy who told you to go back to school earlier on this thread was dead nuts on. You act like you've never heard of a 29er before. The last I looked, today's date was is the year 2009. You need to go back to about 2003 to find out why 29ers are popular/and or a viable alterntive to a 26" mountain bike. If you really have your panties in a bunch about what type of bike you should purchase, I would recommend you ride a unicycle.

Your assumptions follow just what everyone says about assumptions. Your making an a** out of the both of us. To think you know why I'm asking or to think that I haven't ridden both is just stupid. Is it a possible reason, sure, but is it the reason? In this case no. I happen to be interested in why OTHER people like them or not. I happen to sell bikes and have desire to relate to others why people like them for different types of riding. I'm not an avid mountain biker either, so with my limited experience I am asking for more perspective. If I'm doing something wrong here, well I apologize. I guess trying to learn and help people is a bad thing these days. I spent a few hours looking on-line and searching these forums. If you can find lots of good info on the matter (personal perspectives of several users) please share them with me and I'll be more than happy to admit that I suck at finding info on the internet, but please don't insult me when I am being quite reasonable in my question.

I do this sometimes...I occasionally have a random thought and wonder what other people in a similar situation may think. I know good and well that I'm going to do whatever I want and there aren't too many people who can sway the outcome.

I just wonder sometimes what others think about it.

I'd rather have a 26er with more travel than a 29er with less. plus the 29er tires are heavier and a heavy tire is harder to spin up. well I guess if you spin it up less it still rolls farther per revolution.. who knows. hopefully they will go out of style soon and I'll pick one up for cheap.

I'd rather have a 26er with more travel than a 29er with less. plus the 29er tires are heavier and a heavy tire is harder to spin up. well I guess if you spin it up less it still rolls farther per revolution.. who knows. hopefully they will go out of style soon and I'll pick one up for cheap.

I would like to confirm my understanding of your statement please. Your saying you would rather have a wheel/tire that will have less rotational mass because it is easier to increase the rotational velocity vs a wheel/tire with greater mass that will perpetuate it's momentum better correct? Also why do you prefer greater travel than a larger wheel? Would your preference change if we were discussing a hard tail vs a full suspension? Do you feel that the wheel displacement is more valuable than the angle of attack? What sort of riding do you do as well? XC or something more aggressive?