700C vs. 26"
09-05-09, 04:07 PM
#1
Steel is real, baby!
Thread Starter
700C vs. 26"
This has to have been covered many times before, but I am lousy at searching.
Anyway, I am curious as to what the differences are between 26" wheels & 700C, in a touring context; and why some of you prefer one over the other.
Again, sorry if this is an over repetitive topic.
Anyway, I am curious as to what the differences are between 26" wheels & 700C, in a touring context; and why some of you prefer one over the other.
Again, sorry if this is an over repetitive topic.
09-05-09, 04:24 PM
#2
I drank the Kool-Aid!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 562
Bikes: Rivendell Roadini, Rivendell Charlie Gallop Protovelo, Rivendell Clem L
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
1 Post
As long as it's a fatter tire I don't really care about the 700C versus 26" difference HOWEVER because I have a shorter inseam I feel like a bike created for 26" or 650B has better geometry for someone my size versus a taller wheel with a really small frame.
09-05-09, 04:35 PM
#3
Newbie
Note: 700c and 29" is the same size. 29" is what mountain bikers call the 700c wheel/tire size.
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/forum...age=1&nested=0
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/forum...age=1&nested=0
09-05-09, 04:42 PM
#4
Steel is real, baby!
Thread Starter
09-05-09, 05:09 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,329
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
This article should answer most of your questions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touring_bicycle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touring_bicycle
09-05-09, 05:15 PM
#6
weirdo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 1,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
26 is better. That`s because the other bikes in my storage shed have 26 inch non disc wheels with 8-speed cassettes, so I can easilly mix and match tires or wheels. Of course, if I already had a bunch of bikes with 700 or 27 in wheels....
09-05-09, 06:26 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NE Tx
Posts: 2,766
Bikes: Tour Easy, Linear USS, Lightening Thunderbolt, custom DF, Raleigh hybrid, Felt time trial
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'll add since nobody else did, 26" wheels and components are universally available. That's their most important attraction for touring cyclist.
09-05-09, 07:22 PM
#8
weirdo
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 1,962
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Yeah, availability is why some folks go with 26 over 700. Also, the smaller diameter, the stronger the wheel will be, all else equal. With modern spokes and rims, that really isn`t an issue unless you`re carrying a HUGE load. The advantage of 700 or 27 inch is that the bigger the diameter the better it will roll. Again, it`s a pretty minor difference. Wheel size wouldn`t be a deal breaker for me unless it was some kind of oddball size, though some people are more passionate about it than I am. In the US (and apparently Canada and western Europe too), mtb 26" (559) and 700c (622) rims and tires are available fairly easilly in a wide variety. Less so with 27 inch (630), but they`re around too. Any of those sizes will work just fine in US, Canada and Europe.
09-05-09, 08:03 PM
#9
Crazyguyonabike
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lebanon, OR
Posts: 697
Bikes: Co-Motion Divide
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
In general, 26" wheeled bikes have the ability to fit larger tires, since 26" is traditionally seen as "mountain bike" size. So, larger tires are useful in a touring context because they allow for more offroad touring, and more air = more suspension and cushioning, which is more comfort. Larger tires also help to prevent pinch flats. Another one of the big reasons for going with 26" is that it's what you'll find in most other countries, particularly out-of-the-way places like South America, Africa etc. Also, as others have mentioned, with all else being equal, a 26" will be stronger than the equivalent 700C. And last but not least, for smaller sized frames, 26" makes better sense as a wheel size since it allows the frame to be built without having to make compromises in order to shoehorn in the larger wheel size. That can have impact in areas like toe overlap with the front wheel, for example.
That said, a lot of people prefer 700C size wheels. Some of this is tradition, since "road" bikes have had this size (or close to it) for decades. The larger size gives a smoother ride due to the larger circumference. Some people maintain that 700C wheels feel faster on the road, though others vociferously reject that notion. You'll see lots of deep discussions about that go into physics and all sorts of theories. On the downside, 700C wheels often won't take as beefy tires as 26", so that as well tends to relegate them to "mostly" road use, with some offroad possible if your bike has been designed to take the larger sizes, e.g. 700x50.
The conventional wisdom seems to be that if you're planning a road tour in a first world country like America or Europe, then you can really use either 26" or 700C, but a purpose-built 700C road touring bike may be a little more efficient for a road tour than a 26" expedition touring bike. However if you're going to places like South America, Asia, Africa etc, then 26" is usually advised, mainly because you simply won't find any 700C components there (tires, tubes etc); also the roads can be very rough, so the stronger 26" wheels and huge tires make a lot of sense too.
For reference, the Ribbon of Road guys rode their 700C Co-Motion Americano touring bikes down to the tip of South America, and they had a number of wheel issues even though they were being (I think) directly supported and sponsored by Co-Motion:
https://www.ribbonofroad.com/journal.html
Read down quite a bit for the section titled "What´s left of my gear?" - here's the bit on the wheel:
"Rear Rim - Cracked the first time in British Columbia, replaced in Seattle, cracked again in Mexico, replaced in Guatemala. Cracked again in the Bolivian desert, replaced in Argentina. Current status of rim 4 - cracked on the Carretera Austral in Chile, glued and duct-taped together. Keepin´ my fingers crossed! Thank you Co-Motion Cycles for sending replacements!"
That's quite a lot of wheel replacements, really. It may have something to do with the 700C wheel size not being big enough to mount really big tires, I don't know, or it may have had other issues related to the wheel build itself.
This leads on to the final wrinkle, which is the 29er size. This is exciting (particularly to me, since I just bought a 29er Salsa Fargo). I knew little about this until recently, but basically 29er is what might happen if a 26" and a 700C wheel mated and had children. It's 700C in diameter, but wider, able to take huge, MTB-like tires. My Fargo can take up to 2.3" tires (with fenders! without, it'll take just about anything on the market). So this ameliorates some of the 700C "issues", such as not being able to support the rim from damage with large tires as you can with 26". You get the advantages of 700C (smoother rolling) and 26" (big tires). Ok, so the equivalent 26" wheel will technically be stronger because it's smaller and the spokes are shorter, but a well built, stress-relieved wheel should not have any issues to be honest. The only downside of the 29er size is the availability of tires, rims and tubes - it's a new thing, so not that many places have it. Problably even less than 700C. So it's something to consider, but if you're going into the back of beyond, then take your spares with you.
On this issue of "replaceability": In a recent thread on crazyguyonabike, someone made what seemed to me to be a pretty good point. Basically, loads of people tour on motorcycles all over the world. A motorcycle is a much more complex machine than a bicycle, with much, much more that can potentially go wrong. And yet, loads of people still go touring on their motorcycles to the back of beyond. Same with bicycles. I used to obsess about what might go wrong, "what if" this or that, but really as long as you have well maintained equipment, and reasonable spares for consumables (i.e. spare tires if you're going very far, spare tubes for sure, tools etc) then you should be fine. Everything breaks eventually. When it happens, it's almost always some little thing you didn't think of.
Although I can't immediately find any direct reference to what he's been using, I think someone else mentioned somewhere that Jeff Kruys has been touring on either 700C or 29er wheels for the last few years or so down in South America, and he seems to be doing quite ok:
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/jk
So I think it's probably possible to overthink these things (I know I do, but I'm trying to moderate myself). For a long time I was wanting to get myself a 26" expedition tourer. But really, wheel size is probably secondary to getting the right bike that fits you well, has the necessary attributes to handle whatever you want to do with it, and (most important) makes you want to go out and ride it. For me, I'm excited about the Salsa Fargo, it's a nice fun bike to ride, and it's made for carrying a touring load on or off-road, so that's what did it for me. I decided to put my cogitations on 26" availability etc on the back burner and just go with the bike that spoke to me.
Neil
That said, a lot of people prefer 700C size wheels. Some of this is tradition, since "road" bikes have had this size (or close to it) for decades. The larger size gives a smoother ride due to the larger circumference. Some people maintain that 700C wheels feel faster on the road, though others vociferously reject that notion. You'll see lots of deep discussions about that go into physics and all sorts of theories. On the downside, 700C wheels often won't take as beefy tires as 26", so that as well tends to relegate them to "mostly" road use, with some offroad possible if your bike has been designed to take the larger sizes, e.g. 700x50.
The conventional wisdom seems to be that if you're planning a road tour in a first world country like America or Europe, then you can really use either 26" or 700C, but a purpose-built 700C road touring bike may be a little more efficient for a road tour than a 26" expedition touring bike. However if you're going to places like South America, Asia, Africa etc, then 26" is usually advised, mainly because you simply won't find any 700C components there (tires, tubes etc); also the roads can be very rough, so the stronger 26" wheels and huge tires make a lot of sense too.
For reference, the Ribbon of Road guys rode their 700C Co-Motion Americano touring bikes down to the tip of South America, and they had a number of wheel issues even though they were being (I think) directly supported and sponsored by Co-Motion:
https://www.ribbonofroad.com/journal.html
Read down quite a bit for the section titled "What´s left of my gear?" - here's the bit on the wheel:
"Rear Rim - Cracked the first time in British Columbia, replaced in Seattle, cracked again in Mexico, replaced in Guatemala. Cracked again in the Bolivian desert, replaced in Argentina. Current status of rim 4 - cracked on the Carretera Austral in Chile, glued and duct-taped together. Keepin´ my fingers crossed! Thank you Co-Motion Cycles for sending replacements!"
That's quite a lot of wheel replacements, really. It may have something to do with the 700C wheel size not being big enough to mount really big tires, I don't know, or it may have had other issues related to the wheel build itself.
This leads on to the final wrinkle, which is the 29er size. This is exciting (particularly to me, since I just bought a 29er Salsa Fargo). I knew little about this until recently, but basically 29er is what might happen if a 26" and a 700C wheel mated and had children. It's 700C in diameter, but wider, able to take huge, MTB-like tires. My Fargo can take up to 2.3" tires (with fenders! without, it'll take just about anything on the market). So this ameliorates some of the 700C "issues", such as not being able to support the rim from damage with large tires as you can with 26". You get the advantages of 700C (smoother rolling) and 26" (big tires). Ok, so the equivalent 26" wheel will technically be stronger because it's smaller and the spokes are shorter, but a well built, stress-relieved wheel should not have any issues to be honest. The only downside of the 29er size is the availability of tires, rims and tubes - it's a new thing, so not that many places have it. Problably even less than 700C. So it's something to consider, but if you're going into the back of beyond, then take your spares with you.
On this issue of "replaceability": In a recent thread on crazyguyonabike, someone made what seemed to me to be a pretty good point. Basically, loads of people tour on motorcycles all over the world. A motorcycle is a much more complex machine than a bicycle, with much, much more that can potentially go wrong. And yet, loads of people still go touring on their motorcycles to the back of beyond. Same with bicycles. I used to obsess about what might go wrong, "what if" this or that, but really as long as you have well maintained equipment, and reasonable spares for consumables (i.e. spare tires if you're going very far, spare tubes for sure, tools etc) then you should be fine. Everything breaks eventually. When it happens, it's almost always some little thing you didn't think of.
Although I can't immediately find any direct reference to what he's been using, I think someone else mentioned somewhere that Jeff Kruys has been touring on either 700C or 29er wheels for the last few years or so down in South America, and he seems to be doing quite ok:
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/jk
So I think it's probably possible to overthink these things (I know I do, but I'm trying to moderate myself). For a long time I was wanting to get myself a 26" expedition tourer. But really, wheel size is probably secondary to getting the right bike that fits you well, has the necessary attributes to handle whatever you want to do with it, and (most important) makes you want to go out and ride it. For me, I'm excited about the Salsa Fargo, it's a nice fun bike to ride, and it's made for carrying a touring load on or off-road, so that's what did it for me. I decided to put my cogitations on 26" availability etc on the back burner and just go with the bike that spoke to me.
Neil
Last edited by NeilGunton; 09-05-09 at 08:11 PM.
09-05-09, 10:49 PM
#10
40 yrs bike touring
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Santa Barbara,CA.
Posts: 1,021
Bikes: Bruce Gordon Ti Rock N Road [1989], Fat Chance Mountain Tandem [1988], Velo Orange Neutrino (2020)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
5 Posts
Nearly forty years ago my first touring bike was 700c with clearance for a 28mm tire. This was good for most touring but I longed to take more off pavement routes. In the early 1980's I started touring on a mountain bike with 26 inch rims and 2.0 tires. Off pavement routes opened completely to me in Alaska,Western Canada, Mexico, Norway and South America. Great except I felt that I was missing something. On smoother fire roads and on pavement I felt like a slug. Changing tires did not help nor did a custom Ritchey team Comp with steeper road like angles.
In 1989 I ordered a Bruce Gordon RNR with 700x45 wheels. I had regained what had been missing- the ability to roll over obstacles and accelerate yet have protective air volume.
This 28er tire volume provided the suspension and float that I needed off pavement at Crested Butte, Moab, Baja, BC and on the Divide Ride despite intense skepticism and criticism from traditionalists on either the 26 inch or 700c road sides of the debate. I was told repeatedly that the wheels were not strong enough and the tires were too narrow or too wide for single track with or without my touring load. Only by dropping these critics on their own turf on a ride or tour would they begrudgingly accept this new idea of a 28er capable of going almost anywhere my skills would allow.
I am a clydesdale and yet I used my normal 700c wheelset for the Divide Ride and they did not even need truing afterward and I am still using them. Maybe I am just lucky! So when I hear disaster predictions for 700c wheels I remember that the legions of round the world bike tourists in the 20th century used 700c wheels and managed quite well considering their tire width limitations. 28ers and 29ers offer some useful touring tools that should be carefully considered as an option. I am very glad that I did not follow the herd 20 years ago. I found what I was looking for in the RNR.
In 1989 I ordered a Bruce Gordon RNR with 700x45 wheels. I had regained what had been missing- the ability to roll over obstacles and accelerate yet have protective air volume.
This 28er tire volume provided the suspension and float that I needed off pavement at Crested Butte, Moab, Baja, BC and on the Divide Ride despite intense skepticism and criticism from traditionalists on either the 26 inch or 700c road sides of the debate. I was told repeatedly that the wheels were not strong enough and the tires were too narrow or too wide for single track with or without my touring load. Only by dropping these critics on their own turf on a ride or tour would they begrudgingly accept this new idea of a 28er capable of going almost anywhere my skills would allow.
I am a clydesdale and yet I used my normal 700c wheelset for the Divide Ride and they did not even need truing afterward and I am still using them. Maybe I am just lucky! So when I hear disaster predictions for 700c wheels I remember that the legions of round the world bike tourists in the 20th century used 700c wheels and managed quite well considering their tire width limitations. 28ers and 29ers offer some useful touring tools that should be carefully considered as an option. I am very glad that I did not follow the herd 20 years ago. I found what I was looking for in the RNR.
Last edited by arctos; 09-05-09 at 10:50 PM. Reason: spelling
09-05-09, 11:49 PM
#11
More Energy than Sense
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 718
Bikes: Co-Motion Divide
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If you plan on being mostly on the pavement, there wouldn't be much of a difference between 26" and 700c wheels.
If you plan on going to 3rd world countries, 26" wheels/tires are more available but if you had a 700c bike, that wouldn't be a deal killer. 26" expedition touring bikes are a relatively new thing so people had no choice but to cover the globe on 700c and 27" wheels and of course still are.
If you plan on touring on non-paved surfaces, 29er/700c would be the way to go. Check out the Gary Fisher site. He does a great job of explaining the benefits of larger hoops, or at lest he used to. Most XC MTBers, if they had a choice, would prefer a 29er hard tail over a 26er any day of the week.
A few years ago, I thought I bought my dream tourer which has 26" wheels. I am now finding myself touring more on some excellent rails to trails (non paved) in my area. I now really wished my bike had bigger wheels to smooth things out. But that just means another bike is in the horizon.
Consider what type of touring you will do which will narrow it down for you. Also, if you are really tall or the opposite, the choice might be made for you depending on what bike you go with ie LHT, Saga.
If you plan on going to 3rd world countries, 26" wheels/tires are more available but if you had a 700c bike, that wouldn't be a deal killer. 26" expedition touring bikes are a relatively new thing so people had no choice but to cover the globe on 700c and 27" wheels and of course still are.
If you plan on touring on non-paved surfaces, 29er/700c would be the way to go. Check out the Gary Fisher site. He does a great job of explaining the benefits of larger hoops, or at lest he used to. Most XC MTBers, if they had a choice, would prefer a 29er hard tail over a 26er any day of the week.
A few years ago, I thought I bought my dream tourer which has 26" wheels. I am now finding myself touring more on some excellent rails to trails (non paved) in my area. I now really wished my bike had bigger wheels to smooth things out. But that just means another bike is in the horizon.
Consider what type of touring you will do which will narrow it down for you. Also, if you are really tall or the opposite, the choice might be made for you depending on what bike you go with ie LHT, Saga.
Last edited by aroundoz; 09-05-09 at 11:57 PM. Reason: Because I am forgetful
09-05-09, 11:51 PM
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: N. California
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
This has to have been covered many times before, but I am lousy at searching.
Anyway, I am curious as to what the differences are between 26" wheels & 700C, in a touring context; and why some of you prefer one over the other.
Again, sorry if this is an over repetitive topic.
Anyway, I am curious as to what the differences are between 26" wheels & 700C, in a touring context; and why some of you prefer one over the other.
Again, sorry if this is an over repetitive topic.
09-06-09, 12:39 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,737
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
The third tire size, 650B lends itself superbly for loaded touring. Wide tires can roll as fast as narrow ones and if you want to use fenders with a touring bike, it may be just about the only option.
09-06-09, 01:16 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 56
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Although I can't immediately find any direct reference to what he's been using, I think someone else mentioned somewhere that Jeff Kruys has been touring on either 700C or 29er wheels for the last few years or so down in South America, and he seems to be doing quite ok:
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/jk
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/jk
To me, the advantages of 26'' would be the replaceability of rims. Rims do crack, i've read many accounts of it happening. And if that happens you might be thousands of miles from the nearest 700c rim or a long wait and an exorbitant shipping charge away. The main disadvantage is that 29er wheels would "roll better over bumps".
09-06-09, 01:22 PM
#15
Crazyguyonabike
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lebanon, OR
Posts: 697
Bikes: Co-Motion Divide
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
I guess Jeff's rim issue may have been caused by wear and tear from the rim brakes? On this page:
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?page_id=68441
"I believe my front rim is slowly being sanded away by the excessive braking I've been doing in Colombia and Ecuador on the long descents. I'm doubtful that this rim will survive the whole trip."
So I guess that might be an argument in favor of disk brakes...
Neil
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?page_id=68441
"I believe my front rim is slowly being sanded away by the excessive braking I've been doing in Colombia and Ecuador on the long descents. I'm doubtful that this rim will survive the whole trip."
So I guess that might be an argument in favor of disk brakes...
Neil
09-07-09, 12:27 AM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times
in
64 Posts
My preference for 26" wheel is that for a 1.5" sized tire the entire wheel is noticably lighter than a similar 700x37mm sized tire which is nice for unladen riding.
09-07-09, 03:32 AM
#17
Tinkerer since 1980
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 922
Bikes: Coppi racer, Old school BMX, some random a fixed wheel convertion
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
??? You can fit mudguards to 26" wheels and 700c wheels with narrow or wide tyres.
09-07-09, 04:21 AM
#18
Newbie
I guess Jeff's rim issue may have been caused by wear and tear from the rim brakes? On this page:
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?page_id=68441
"I believe my front rim is slowly being sanded away by the excessive braking I've been doing in Colombia and Ecuador on the long descents. I'm doubtful that this rim will survive the whole trip."
So I guess that might be an argument in favor of disk brakes...
Neil
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?page_id=68441
"I believe my front rim is slowly being sanded away by the excessive braking I've been doing in Colombia and Ecuador on the long descents. I'm doubtful that this rim will survive the whole trip."
So I guess that might be an argument in favor of disk brakes...
Neil
https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/p...id=117019&v=75
Both Jeff and David are using 700x35c Schwalbe Marathon tires. Apart from asphalt, they have ridden over some pretty difficult terrain which is a testament of how strong a 700c wheel can be. If durability is paramount, one could always use a larger Schwalbe Marathon tire in size 700x50c or a 29er tire if the frame can accommodate.
Last edited by matchy99; 09-07-09 at 04:37 AM.
09-07-09, 04:32 AM
#19
Newbie
That's true, except that Jeff seems to have experienced the downside of touring with such of setup. In his journal you can read about how he had to stay put in a city for a long time waiting for new rims to be shipped at a cost of $500 (just for the shipping).
To me, the advantages of 26'' would be the replaceability of rims. Rims do crack, i've read many accounts of it happening. And if that happens you might be thousands of miles from the nearest 700c rim or a long wait and an exorbitant shipping charge away. The main disadvantage is that 29er wheels would "roll better over bumps".
To me, the advantages of 26'' would be the replaceability of rims. Rims do crack, i've read many accounts of it happening. And if that happens you might be thousands of miles from the nearest 700c rim or a long wait and an exorbitant shipping charge away. The main disadvantage is that 29er wheels would "roll better over bumps".
Last edited by matchy99; 09-07-09 at 04:39 AM.
09-08-09, 05:40 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Finger lakes N.Y.
Posts: 126
Bikes: trek 4800, trek 4300, trek 1.5, nashbar touring frame build, 1985 takara medalion, 1982 motobicane mirage sport and a few pieced together rigs
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
48 spoke 700c wheels
I have found that a 48 spoke 700c wheel with a good hub can and will take as much or more abuse as a mountian 26" wheel. I am in the process of building what I feel will be a bomb proof tour bike.
09-08-09, 07:02 PM
#21
family on bikes
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: on my bike between North and South
Posts: 2,376
Bikes: which one?
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Both Jeff and David are using 700x35c Schwalbe Marathon tires. Apart from asphalt, they have ridden over some pretty difficult terrain which is a testament of how strong a 700c wheel can be. If durability is paramount, one could always use a larger Schwalbe Marathon tire in size 700x50c or a 29er tire if the frame can accommodate.
If I had it to do over again, I would try to get 26" - only for availability. It is a bit nervewracking knowing that I cannot replace anything here without having it shipped in. However - those blasted bike makers in the USA don't seem to understand that some of us want big touring bikes with 26" wheels!
04-29-11, 10:28 PM
#22
family on bikes
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: on my bike between North and South
Posts: 2,376
Bikes: which one?
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Figured I would update this thread with my thoughts on the 26" vs 700c issue now that we've finished our journey. Long story short, I will never leave the US with 700c again. Here is the whole story: https://familyonbikes.org/blog/?p=1783
04-30-11, 02:03 PM
#23
Retro-Grouch
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Dartmouth, MA
Posts: 170
Bikes: 83 Fuji Touring IV, 90 Univega Alpina Pro MTB, REI road bike, others in pieces
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
To hell with either. I'm running 27" on my "now vintage" Touring bike.
04-30-11, 10:39 PM
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,886
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 611 Post(s)
Liked 291 Times
in
200 Posts
One thing that rarely gets mentioned is toe overlap on some frames with 700's. That may or may not bother you but I had a friend who based his purchase of a 26" wheeled touring bike on this alone.
04-30-11, 10:57 PM
#25
Banned
Ok touring.. where? touring bike as a thing you just ride it around ,
in places to have a wide options of spares, like tires
.. or as a vehicle to get you far and wide?
world wide , reportedly 559 tires are #1, ..the mountain bike has penetrated the rural world.
406 are #2. all those kids and BMX bikes , 622 23 for road-sport riding,
700c 32 + touring tires re way down in sourcing .. wherever..
in places to have a wide options of spares, like tires
.. or as a vehicle to get you far and wide?
world wide , reportedly 559 tires are #1, ..the mountain bike has penetrated the rural world.
406 are #2. all those kids and BMX bikes , 622 23 for road-sport riding,
700c 32 + touring tires re way down in sourcing .. wherever..