Classic & Vintage - Anyone regret going the 650B route?

Sure there's lot of praise for the wider tire ride at lower pressures, and the seemingly perfect in between size of the 650B. Of course finding one to test-ride is another story. I'm tempted to build a VO Polyvalent but I'm wondering if others have done the same only to retreat back to their 28mm tires or similar? Was it not what everyone said it would be?

Besides a conversion, which can obviously be tricky with brakes, and Kogswell out of business, my 650 "test" frame options seem limited.

no

http://www.rawlandcycles.com/store/index.php?strWebAction=item_detail&intItemID=3953
http://www.renehersebicycles.com/Randonneur%20bikes.htm

I don't think a conversion is all the complicated. Just find brakes with long enough reach - they're out there. Search the web and find what frames people have successfully used.

That being said, I don't find the ride of my 650B Kogswell radically different from my 700x32c Trek TX500. It's a bit more cushy and the Hetres tires do feel a bit quicker than the 32c Paselas. Also, the 42mm Hetres are a little more forgiving on rough pavement and gravel. It's more of a luxury to me than a necessity. I could live without the 650b. But I don't regret building it up and I enjoy riding it. It's my 'A' ride now.

I gotta say no, also. I find the ride on my Bleriot to be really comfortable, if a tad bit slower. I commute and tour so speed is not of the essence. I'm running 40-something Col Di Vies. If there is a regret, it's that the Bleriot is too nice for what I use it for.

There are always drum and disc brakes, too. I run drums on the above.

I did some heavy touring with a C-dale T1000 that came stock with (700c) 38 mm Conti Top Touring tires and Ritchey Rock rims pumped to 85 psi. I didn't like them with a full load and "retreated" to 28 mm. This isn't specific to 650Bs, just wide tires.

Otherwise I'd love to try 650B's on an English Sports bike if they'd fit.

i have a Surly Long Haul Trucker that has 26" wheels on it, and I recently went from 1.5" tires to 2" ones. Surprisingly, it felt "faster" with the wider tires! Not sure if this translates to 650B but it went a long way towards validating Jan Heine's claims about wide tires being faster, in my mind at least.

i have a Surly Long Haul Trucker that has 26" wheels on it, and I recently went from 1.5" tires to 2" ones. Surprisingly, it felt "faster" with the wider tires! Not sure if this translates to 650B but it went a long way towards validating Jan Heine's claims about wide tires being faster, in my mind at least.


There are fast wide tires, and there are slow wide tires. There are fast narrow tires, and there are slow narrow tires. Generally, the higher the thread count and the more expensive the tire, the faster it will feel.

I'm strongly considering doing this for my VeloSoleX, because I just plain do not have room for fenders with 700Cx28s. I *had* had a set of Airweights on it, but I put on a V-O front rack and now there's about 2mm of room between the daruma nut and the tire. I suppose that what's stopping me is the very few tires available, though the ones that are seem to be very good indeed. I dunno.

So does old French frame+Nuovo Tip0 Hubs+Cr-18s+Grand Bois+Airweights=Hotness?

... but I put on a V-O front rack and now there's about 2mm of room between the daruma nut and the tire.

I feel like I've already explained it to you, but you can get more clearance there with the "nut" from a seatpost binder or recessed brake. If that doesn't sound familiar and you'd like to know more send me an email.

And, yes, your math looks correct to me.

I know someone that did a 650b conversion. the bb drop that resulted was too low.

I prefer, for various reasons, a fat tire 700c in the 32-38mm range. The difference between this and a 650b bicycle is subtle, imho. An easier conversion is 27" to 700c, but if your measurements are in the acceptable range for a 700c to 650b conversion (and your brakes will work or if you dont mind taking the frame/fork to a framebuilder for modification), go for it.

I dont think "regret" is common if things are done right...I think "underwhelmed" would be more common particularly in the face of so many reports of 650b being the greatest thing ever...like riding on magical marshmellows. I think wide tires and low psi are great, but they're not that great. Keep expectations healthy and on this side of reality, and you'll be very pleased.

Personally (and perhaps this is controversial in the C&V forum), but I think if the major tire manufacturers put a little research and development into 650b tires...or have the tech/research/knowledge of compounds trickle over from their high-end 700c offerings...then things can get awesome. The current state of available 650b tires is still on the basic, low-end (i.e. Panaracer built tires). People love Panaracer tires just fine, but their tires simply are not on par with the offerings of Schwalbe, Continental, Michelin, and Vittoria.

From the tires I've inspected, I don't feel like Panaracer isn't lagging behind other tire manufacturers in tech level at all. On the contrary, they seem to be better at making non-handmade tires than anyone else.

The corners the MFR has to cut to make price point seem to be the biggest defining characteristics of every tire except the very top-end. Once you're there, it's the tradeoffs between fast and tough, sticky and long-wearing.

I know someone that did a 650b conversion. the bb drop that resulted was too low.

I prefer, for various reasons, a fat tire 700c in the 32-38mm range. The difference between this and a 650b bicycle is subtle, imho. An easier conversion is 27" to 700c, but if your measurements are in the acceptable range for a 700c to 650b conversion (and your brakes will work or if you dont mind taking the frame/fork to a framebuilder for modification), go for it.

I dont think "regret" is common if things are done right...I think "underwhelmed" would be more common particularly in the face of so many reports of 650b being the greatest thing ever...like riding on magical marshmellows. I think wide tires and low psi are great, but they're not that great. Keep expectations healthy and on this side of reality, and you'll be very pleased.

Personally (and perhaps this is controversial in the C&V forum), but I think if the major tire manufacturers put a little research and development into 650b tires...or have the tech/research/knowledge of compounds trickle over from their high-end 700c offerings...then things can get awesome. The current state of available 650b tires is still on the basic, low-end (i.e. Panaracer built tires). People love Panaracer tires just fine, but their tires simply are not on par with the offerings of Schwalbe, Continental, Michelin, and Vittoria.

Yeah, I'd LOVE to have Michelin Pros in 650x38c, but doubt that I'll see 'em in this lifetime.

I've tried both 650x38b and 700x35c, and (at least in part due to differences in the respective bikes) came down on the side of 650b. IME, there's a not so subtle difference in feel between the two. Ride quality and cornering are pretty much indistinguishable, but the 650b's seem to "spin up" faster, even with essentially the same wheel/tire weight. My theory is that it has to do with how far the weight is from the wheel center: the smaller the distance, the easier it is to accelerate (and decelerate). Anyway, I like the 650b's well enough that I'm selling the 700c bike, and the 650b bike is my every-day ride.

(And I spose I should say, the comparision was between Panaracer Paselas in 700x35c and 650x38c Soma B-Sides, which are essentially a 650b, folding bead Pasela. So pretty much identical tires, other than diameter.)

SP
Bend, OR

650b. I just wish there were more rim options, especially at the lower end.

Why 650b over 26"? Is this more of a fit issue for a 700c bike?

i'm converting all of my bikes to 650b or selling the ones that can't be converted.

My only regret in going down the 650B route is that I hadn't bothered to have my fork re-raked when I did a full-blown conversion. But this has everything to do with the bike's geometry and nothing to do with 650B wheels versus 700C/27". Converting transformed the bike in a very good way, but it could have been even more of a gem had I gone the extra mile.


Why 650b over 26"? Is this more of a fit issue for a 700c bike?

Yes. 650B allows you to convert a 700C road bike while keeping the original geometry the same (except for a slight drop in height). 26" is too far of a leap for a frame designed for 700C wheels.

Can't say I have regretted going with 650b wheels, I am a shorter than average dude at 5'5" and the smaller wheels seem to work better with my dimensions for the most part. I have a Sam Hillborne in 650b and love it, way nice riding with my super duper expensive wheelset with Pari-Motos on it, much better on the road than the Fatty Rumpkins that I had used. I had Riv build me a set of wheels with their Phil "Rivy" 7 speed freewheel hubs laced to Velocity Dyad Rims and the choice was a good one. I have to stick with the freewheel thing though, but I thought it was totally worth it, and it is. Using those wheels with the Pari-Motos feels better than riding 700x25's on my other bikes, cushier, more responsive and faster if you can believe it. I feel better about some of the really bad roads that I ride through all the time with the wider tires and tough rims.

I don't know if I have a frame currently that would work well converted to 650b, I don't see any reason to go to a smaller diameter wheel if I can't get a tire at least 38mm wide in there, and my current bikes really don't work for that, the few that I could use are too narrow at the chainstay. Maybe in the future I should look for one, it would be a fun project and I have a spare set of wheels.


i'm converting all of my bikes to 650b or selling the ones that can't be converted.

Awesome!:thumb:

Why 650b over 26"? Is this more of a fit issue for a 700c bike?

650b is 26" but remember there are many different 26" specs. 650b is just one of them. See http://sheldonbrown.com/26.html for complete information.

650c is uncommon and seems to be racing oriented. I've only seen very narrow tires in that size. 650a is the same as wheels that came on English 3-speeds and many other bikes. Rim and tire selection isn't very good. 650b has some excellent rims and tires available. Unfortunately for me, they're all pretty expensive, so I won't be doing 650b conversions any time soon.

JunkYardBike, it's not that conversion is complicated, it's that it's expensive. And wait a sec. It can be complicated. Sometimes brakes actually are hard to fit, depending on the situation. And you better make a prediction about BB height or you get a pretty lousy bike. The 70's Raleighs have some low BB's.



i'm converting all of my bikes to 650b or selling the ones that can't be converted.

Pay attention to this silly man. He never says anything he means.

Clubman, it's possible you overinflated those tires, which would explain your dissatisfaction. Or maybe they were just crappy tires. I don't know about those.


I think "underwhelmed" would be more common particularly in the face of so many reports of 650b being the greatest thing ever...like riding on magical marshmellows. I think wide tires and low psi are great, but they're not that great. Keep expectations healthy and on this side of reality, and you'll be very pleased.

Maybe, but when I took a very short test ride on Zaphod Beeblebrox's 650b bike, I was totally amazed. He has the Hetres on it.


Personally (and perhaps this is controversial in the C&V forum), but I think if the major tire manufacturers put a little research and development into 650b tires...or have the tech/research/knowledge of compounds trickle over from their high-end 700c offerings...then things can get awesome. The current state of available 650b tires is still on the basic, low-end (i.e. Panaracer built tires). People love Panaracer tires just fine, but their tires simply are not on par with the offerings of Schwalbe, Continental, Michelin, and Vittoria.

To each his own. Panaracer are my favorite tires, and they've been among my favorites for about 30 years. Every brand makes some excellent tires, but the amazing thing with Panaracers is that even their low end tires are pretty darned nice. I recently rode an old Schwinn with original Schwinn-branded tires made by Panaracer. Very impressive.

Also, many years ago, I had some Panaracer tubular tires. At the time, I think they were the only tubulars made with nylon casings rather than cotton or silk. The ride was excellent, the price was super-excellent, and so was the durability. I think a lot of Panaracer tires don't get respect because their prices are too low.

650c is uncommon and seems to be racing oriented. I've only seen very narrow tires in that size.

Actually, there are two different and non-interchangeable 650C (bead seat diameter 571mm) tire sizes: the time trial/small frame road bike 650C tires, that are, oh, round about 1" wide, and the original semi-balloon 650C size which we call in America 26x 1 3/4.


650a is the same as wheels that came on English 3-speeds and many other bikes. Rim and tire selection isn't very good.

Here are the 650A (a.k.a. 26 x 1 3/8 a.k.a. EA3 a.k.a. ISO590) tires I found available when I looked last, around 6 months ago:

Bell Sports Streetster (folding)
Chengshin C638
Continental City Ride
Hutchinson Junior
Innova Cloud Nine
IRC Super Gold
IRC Super Seed
IRC City POPS
Kenda gumwall
Kenda Cross (knobby)
Kenda K40 Street
Michelin World Tour
Nutrak Traditional
Nu-teck (airless)
Panaracer Col de Vie
Panaracer Passhunter (light knobby)
Panaracer ST Daily Commuting
Pyramid gumwall
Pyramid Sunlite Hybrid Nimbus
Raleigh Record
Rubena Flash V66
Schwalbe Delta Cruiser (available in cream color)
Schwalbe Marathon
Schwalbe Marathon Plus
Schwalbe Speedway Pro (knobby)
Specialized TriSport
Vittoria Randonneur
Vredestein Perfect Tour
Vredestein Dynamic Tour
Vredestein Classic

I've never had a problem finding rims for ISO590mm.

tcs, other than the Col de la Vie, is any of those tires light weight and pleasant to ride? And are these various tires actually available? Not all the sizes made are available in the US.

And is there a good selection of rims? The Sun CR-18 is a nice rim, but is there something else that's as good or better?

Not too sure about this whole conversion thing. I guess I'll have to ride one and see, but I'm really having trouble seeing how there could be that big a difference between wide 27" or 700C tires or 26" for that matter. Or maybe I'll step off the bike with crazy 650b diameter irises and say "Now I understand!" My concern is that 650b is yet another fad that will end up seeing a bunch of beautiful old road bikes turned into something they weren't meant to be. Surely that happened enough already with the fixie craze. On the upside, maybe people could take all those drewed fixie frames, add canti mounts and turn them into 650B's, or 6-fixie-B's, or...

Not too sure about this whole conversion thing. I guess I'll have to ride one and see, but I'm really having trouble seeing how there could be that big a difference between wide 27" or 700C tires or 26" for that matter.
650b makes larger tire sizes less of a problem on smaller frames. And a big 700c requires compromises on the chainstays.


And is there a good selection of rims? The Sun CR-18 is a nice rim, but is there something else that's as good or better?there are the Velocity Dyad and Synergy

there are the Velocity Dyad and Synergy

Tom was speaking of ISO 590, not 584. Those rims aren't made in the 590 size, I don't think.

Tom is correct. The CR-18 and Col de la Vie are pretty much the best you can do in 650a (ISO 590). You can do better in 650b (ISO 584)/

[QUOTE=unterhausen;13299050]650b makes larger tire sizes less of a problem on smaller frames. And a big 700c requires compromises on the chainstays.

My Atala has plenty of room for 32's. I haven't bothered trying but I'm pretty sure my Cinelli B does as well, and I don't see any compromises there. I usually ride 21's so 32 sounds pretty darn big to me, but maybe you guys are in another league.

My only regret in going down the 650B route is that I hadn't bothered to have my fork re-raked when I did a full-blown conversion. But this has everything to do with the bike's geometry and nothing to do with 650B wheels versus 700C/27". Converting transformed the bike in a very good way, but it could have been even more of a gem had I gone the extra mile.



Yes. 650B allows you to convert a 700C road bike while keeping the original geometry the same (except for a slight drop in height). 26" is too far of a leap for a frame designed for 700C wheels.

What would you have done to the fork, if you'd gone the extra mile? I understand that mechanical trail is a function of wheel diameter, head tube angle, and fork offset, so changing any one of those will change mechanical trail. But changing fork offset will also change head tube angle, as well as every other related angle. Does anyone have their fork re-raked when they change their tires?

It seems to me it must come down to a question of exactly how much is "a slight drop in height"?

As I understand, the following tires in theory all have the same outside diameter (660 mm):

38 x 650B (26 x 1 1/2)
35 x 650A (26 x 1 3/8)
19 x 700c

Of course a fatter 700c tire will change the wheel size, and therefore BB height etc; 23 x 700c would bring the diameter up 8 mm, 32 x 700c would bring it up 26 mm, and so on. But all these changes are within the range of tire sizes commonly available for 700c rims.

What would you have done to the fork, if you'd gone the extra mile? I understand that mechanical trail is a function of wheel diameter, head tube angle, and fork offset, so changing any one of those will change mechanical trail. But changing fork offset will also change head tube angle, as well as every other related angle. Does anyone have their fork re-raked when they change their tires?

It seems to me it must come down to a question of exactly how much is "a slight drop in height"?

As I understand, the following tires in theory all have the same outside diameter (660 mm):

38 x 650B (26 x 1 1/2)
35 x 650A (26 x 1 3/8)
19 x 700c

Of course a fatter 700c tire will change the wheel size, and therefore BB height etc; 23 x 700c would bring the diameter up 8 mm, 32 x 700c would bring it up 26 mm, and so on. But all these changes are within the range of tire sizes commonly available for 700c rims.

Rudi, I calculated the mechanical trail on my bike based on its original 27x1-1/4" tires, and that came out to 50mm. Given that value, I knew how it rode, and knew that the front end felt slightly sluggish to steering. I surmised that reducing the trail would lighten it up. The difference in trail by the 13mm drop that would result from conversion amounted to about 6mm... and I made a prediction that that 44mm trail as resulting from conversion would do the trick. I was wrong. I should not have made that prediction, and should have had the fork re-raked to provide an additional ~10mm of rake, bringing the trail down to the high 30s. I still don't know for a fact that this would have been the special sauce needed to "fix" what I felt was a shortcoming of the bike, but an educated guess predicts it could only have helped.

Your prediction of outside diameters is correct. A 19mm 700c tire should have the same outer diameter as a 38mm 650B tire. That's the whole reason for converting 700c road bikes. I was going from 32mm 27" tires to 42mm 650B, with a 13mm resulting frame drop. This was okay, since I knew it would reduce the trail, and my BB height was very high to start with-- 281mm before, 268 after. 268 is a very reasonable BB height.

I mentioned "slight drop" because most people don't convert racing bikes with 19mm tires, because those frames usually have very tight clearances and don't make ideal conversion candidates. It seems that most bikes that get converted are starting with 25-30mm 700C tires. Hence a drop of 6-11mm with 38mm 650B tires. Perhaps my use of the word "slight" was too vague and subjective.

Adding a centimeter of offset to the fork would not be a big job; you can still have it done, or do it yourself, without hurting the paint.

Incidentally... and I mention this merely by way of conversation, without implying that you should do anything similar: When I got my Lambert frame, complete with generic non-original chromed steel fork (the original being an aluminum 'death fork') I found the top tube sloped too much; higher at the front. So I bent a little more offset into the fork. I clamped the dropouts to a pair of bed rails using a QR and front hub, put some random piece of lumber under the bend in the fork to serve as a fulcrum, put a nice long cheater bar over the steerer, and pushed downward on the end of that. Just a little, until I overcame the initial resistance of the metal (very scientific, huh!), then I stopped. Worked fine; the bike is stable, rides nicely hands-free. And the top tube is horizontal, which is the important thing.

650b is 26" .........

In the mountain bike world, there's a very slowly growing number of 650B bikes out there, more often than not these bikes were designed for 650 B wheels, they're not usually "conversions." Jamis is a mainstream company, for example, that's embracing the 650 B wheel size for mountain bikes.

Anyway, the point I wanted to make is that instead of being called 650 B, sometimes they're called 27.5" wheels. Which, if you keep things completely in the context of mountain bikes with tires that are two inches wide or a little wider, this makes sense. 559 BSD is a 26", 622 BSD is 29," and right between the two is 650B (584 BSD), 27.5."

I've done a lot of mountain biking on both 26ers and 29ers, never on a 650 B (27.5er?:D). There are those who say that 650 B is the perfect wheel size for mountain biking; keeps the wheel small enough to be "flickable" like a 26er, big enough to have most of the roll-over-anything advantages of a 29er. I suppose you could make the argument that it's neither as flickable as a 26er nor as advantageous for roll-over capability as a 29er, but that's a half-empty outlook, I guess. :D

Just wanted to point out that in some circles, 650 B is aka 27.5." :)

I would really like to participate in the 650b discussion even though my application is contemporary in style & construction, and not vintage. I've discovered the theoretical math does not always correspond with real world changes in geometry. Bottom bracket drop and axle to crown differences are determined by the radius and not diameter. Rim width, tire construction, and tire pressure affect actual radius. Not all tires have a true round cross-section, some tires are beyond egg shaped to near parabolic. Predicted changes in stability due to altered trail can be offset by new tire shape; wide, round cross-section tires have a stabilizing effect on their own. I'm omitting front tire loading from panniers, handlebar bags, etc., and the light bulb effect (flop) created by wide tires mounted on narrow rims. I have a Hetre 42mm (nominal) tire mounted to an extra wide 584 (650b) rim that is only 3mm less overall height than a Michelin 25mm (nominal) mounted to a standard 622 (700c) rim. The theoretical math says the drop should be greater. Unless the goal is to be loaded up for touring, or major front or rear loading, I don't think micro analyzing the differences in "conversion" geometries is important. Wide tires at low air pressures are forgiving on many levels.

To the OP, no regrets with the 650b size. My choice fat low pressure tires on wide heavy rims does increase climbing effort, but that characteristic is offset by confidence inspiring stability on the descent.

I've been meaning to try a 29er bike. I've worked on a few at the LBS, and they seem like they'd be SO MUCH FUN. Now tubeless tires are becoming popular, especially in that size, and oh man, do I want to try it.

well-biked, call me a half empty guy, but everything is a compromise, but I find it hard to believe that 650b (584) is significantly better for offroad than either 559 or 622.

I find it hard to believe that 650b (584) is significantly better for offroad than either 559 or 622.

And I find it hard to believe you left 650a (590) off that list!

But seriously, its not a question of diameter. It's a question of what's the best tire you can fit in a given frame. If the frame was made for skinny-but-not-too-skinny 700c's, then you can 650b it and get the benefits of fatter tires without otherwise changing the geometry (much). Bonus if you want a really good tire, since really good tires are available in the 650b size. If you're not going to go for expensive tires, I am not sure 650b makes sense; I can't imagine there's any perceptible difference between Col-de-la-vie tires in 38 x 684 and Col-de-la-vie tires in 38 x 690, which I already have:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6153/6163487216_074589fa4a_b.jpg

One disadvantage of 650B is that there are no low-priced rims or tires available.

By the way, how do you like the col de la vie tires?

And I agree that there couldn't possibly be a perceptible difference between 584 and 590.

I've been meaning to try a 29er bike. I've worked on a few at the LBS, and they seem like they'd be SO MUCH FUN. Now tubeless tires are becoming popular, especially in that size, and oh man, do I want to try it.

well-biked, call me a half empty guy, but everything is a compromise, but I find it hard to believe that 650b (584) is significantly better for offroad than either 559 or 622.

You should indeed try a 29er.....25 psi, tubeless, with a 29 x 2.4" tire is unmatched for ride quality over rough terrain. :)

As for the question of whether one size is better than another, we could debate all day about that. As for 584 BSD, the real question is whether it's just a little better for whatever you're wanting the bike to do handling-wise......if yes, then the question becomes: are the drawbacks worth the benefit?

By the way, how do you like the col de la vie tires?

I don't know. Remember that discussion, I think Aaron was involved, where I insisted I couldn't feel the difference between different framesets, different kinds of tubing, different wheels, etc? Okay, having established that I must be handicapped in the area of perception, I think I like the cdlv tires better than the Vredestein ones I was using before, but I suspect I just had the Vredestein's inflated too hard. In other words, I don't notice much difference.

My Atala has plenty of room for 32's. I don't consider 32's to be particularly large. Most sports touring bikes from the '70s came with 27x1 1/4, which is about the same as most 700cx32. Those bikes did have what many people consider to be performance-sapping chainstay length though

as far as the original question, there do seem to be a steady flow of 650b wheelsets with "100 miles" on them on ebay. So those people probably had regrets. I doubt it makes your bike feels snappy and light, although my first 650b bike is still on the drawing board

I only have one 650b bike and it is a conversion of a PX10. Even after the first ride I can definitely see the benefit to 650b. Now I want to build another and have been thinking of the VO Poly Mk2 maybe? I don't know if I agree with Tom saying no low cost tires or rims exist for 650b. The CdlV can be found online for $20. The basic Kendas are even cheaper than that. I do agree the rims/wheels can be tougher to find. I looked around a little and found some Shimano hubs (cassette rear) laced to Velocity Twin Hollow 650b rims for $153 (after shipping). J&B use to carry a Weinmann Zac 19 rim in 650b and as complete wheelsets. The rims are still listed, but out of stock at almost all warehouses. They don't list any completes except for a Shimano/Syngery set. Well, low cost tires exist, but I will agree on the wheels.

As to off road sizes the reason that there are 26", 650b (aka 27.5), and 29er can be attributed to rider size. A lot of people will never be tall enough to ride a true 29er unless it is a full on custom and the designer does a lot of weird things with the geometry. The mountain 650b is a good idea for some of the shorter riders that want some of the benefits of the big 29er wheels. A few more companies are starting to make tires which was the biggest problem when 29ers started. I am a 7+ year 29er rider so I know how it feels to be able to choose from on a few models of tires. Also, some people have been converting their disc equipped 26" mtn bikes to 650b to get to try the big(ger) wheels kool aid.

Also, some people have been converting their disc equipped 26" mtn bikes to 650b to get to try the big(ger) wheels kool aid.

and here I was just wondering if anyone went the other way from 26" to do a 650 b conversion. Probably rather difficult with Canti brakes though (or maybe not?).

IME any new set of tires or wheels makes you 2 mph faster. For a while.

It's too bad we can't do blindfold tests to see if anyone can really tell the difference.

IME any new set of tires or wheels makes you 2 mph faster. For a while.

Probably true! I have another theory - I bet a lot of people are going from crappy 700c tires to expensive 650b tires, hence the wonderful ride.

I remember reading on the VO blog a few weeks ago that a new cantilever brake they will be getting in will permit a 26" mtb to 650B conversion. Paul Mfg makes a linear pull brake which will also permit this type of conversion.

As to the cost of rims, whatever happened to the ZAC 19 rim? I understand there was a quality control problem because the diameter was either too big or small. The pair I bought were perfect, and I believe I paid $30.00 per rim. Does anyone Know if they will be sold again?

Immediately felt the difference between 700x25c to 650x38b. It's like the cracks in the road shrunk!!


EDIT: btw, went from Conti Gatorskins to SOma B lines

Like several others in this thread, I have no experience with 650B's, but I'm not going to let that stop me from posting. :p

What I *do* have experience with are the 37-590 tires on my 3-speed, and if they're anything like 650B's, they're great. It's not like you're floating on "magic marshmellows", but the cracks and bumps in the road are a lot gentler, so you can relax more when the road is rough.

Heh, every one of these threads tempts me a little more to buy some 650B wheels and Tektro 556 brakes for my Bianchi... ;)

- Scott

In the mountain bike world, there's a very slowly growing number of 650B bikes out there, more often than not these bikes were designed for 650 B wheels, they're not usually "conversions." Jamis is a mainstream company, for example, that's embracing the 650 B wheel size for mountain bikes.


Anyway, the point I wanted to make is that instead of being called 650 B, sometimes they're called 27.5" wheels. Which, if you keep things completely in the context of mountain bikes with tires that are two inches wide or a little wider, this makes sense. 559 BSD is a 26", 622 BSD is 29," and right between the two is 650B (584 BSD), 27.5."

I've done a lot of mountain biking on both 26ers and 29ers, never on a 650 B (27.5er?:D). There are those who say that 650 B is the perfect wheel size for mountain biking; keeps the wheel small enough to be "flickable" like a 26er, big enough to have most of the roll-over-anything advantages of a 29er. I suppose you could make the argument that it's neither as flickable as a 26er nor as advantageous for roll-over capability as a 29er, but that's a half-empty outlook, I guess. :D

Just wanted to point out that in some circles, 650 B is aka 27.5." :)


Use of 650B for MTBs isn't new. Mid to high level Raleigh MTBs came with them back in the late 80s.
I've been keeping an eye for them on CL as a way to acquire a cheap pair to try out on frames with other wheel sizes.

It's interesting to learn about the 27.5" naming. Too bad, adds to more confusion. 28 and 29er is bad enough. You'd think they'd learn from the 26" mess.

One can always build a '96er'. Seen some high end customs in this configuration. 29er front, 559mm rear.
Best of both worlds literally. Except the need to carry two tubes. ;)

Just checked ebay for 650B wheelsets.....seems pricey still to me.

Use of 650B for MTBs isn't new. Mid to high level Raleigh MTBs came with them back in the late 80s.
I've been keeping an eye for them on CL as a way to acquire a cheap pair to try out on frames with other wheel sizes.

It's interesting to learn about the 27.5" naming. Too bad, adds to more confusion. 28 and 29er is bad enough. You'd think they'd learn from the 26" mess.

One can always build a '96er'. Seen some high end customs in this configuration. 29er front, 559mm rear.
Best of both worlds literally. Except the need to carry two tubes. ;)

Just checked ebay for 650B wheelsets.....seems pricey still to me.

The problem, as I see it, is that there aren't many 650b mountain bike tires or suspension forks on the market, and the use of this wheel size for mtb's may go away almost entirely, who knows. A lot of folks thought that of 29ers nine or ten years ago, though, and they're now extremely common (and yes, I know the origins of 622 BSD mtb's go back further than 9 or 10 years, but that's when Fisher put them in their lineup and it worked out pretty well for them ;)). Interesting about Raleigh mtb's having 650b wheels in the '80's, I don't remember that.

We've thought about bringing one of the 650b Jamis bikes in, but not ready to, yet. The Jamis 650B's are nice, higher end bikes, and I haven't tried one. I'd like to.

I wouldn't have a 96er or a 69er. Jive, in my opinion. Make up your mind, I say. :D

and here I was just wondering if anyone went the other way from 26" to do a 650 b conversion. Probably rather difficult with Canti brakes though (or maybe not?).

not hard/expensive with these:
http://www.crupibmx.com/images/products/brakes/brake-adapter-sinz.jpg

sinz brake adapter.

The problem, as I see it, is that there aren't many 650b mountain bike tires or suspension forks on the market, and the use of this wheel size for mtb's may go away almost entirely, who knows. A lot of folks thought that of 29ers nine or ten years ago, though, and they're now extremely common

I'm of relatively normal height, but a 29er is really too big for me and makes it hard to get the h'bars down to my preferred height. So I predict that 650b will continue to grow in popularity since it fills that niche for those of us (almost half of the cycling population) that don't have long enough legs to make a 29'er an appropriate choice.

IME any new set of tires or wheels makes you 2 mph faster. For a while.

It's too bad we can't do blindfold tests to see if anyone can really tell the difference.

And why not?

Some old 80's Schwinn MTN bikes also used 650b wheels (Mirada I think was one). 26" to 650b can be done sometimes. I tried a vintage 26" mtn frameset I had sitting around and put on some 650b wheels (from a Mirada) and with some V-Brakes and the pads almost all the way to the top worked perfectly. The Mirada wheels I used as my test basis for my PX10 conversion. I was able to test fit the wheels and measure the brake reach I needed before ever spending money. I even upgraded the rear Mirada wheel to Q/R, but wheel wasnt very round anymore so I ordered the parts to build up new wheels.

As for mtn 650b tires there are the two tires from Pacenti, Kenda Nevegal, Interloc Racing Fire Cross, WTB Wolverine, and maybe one or two others I am forgetting. I found this list of 650b rims (http://650bpalace.blogspot.com/2009/08/650b-rims.html) that lists everything 650b rim wise. The 29er movement basically started in the late 90's when after some industry pressure WTB started making the Nanoraptor. Gary Fisher was the first big brand on board. I the beginning you were riding one of only a few 29er tires aboard a Gary Fisher or a handmade custom. For you fix of offroading 650b I suggest visiting http://650bpalace.blogspot.com/