Yeah, mostly 135mm rear

Differences?
Xbike
http://www.highintensitybikeshop.com...%20SS%2009.jpg
29er
http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/6639/0308honzo02.jpg
> I ain't commuting nowhere on that pig.

From my quick math, it's not 'really' a 29er until you hit a tire that's about two inches in height. Below that and you're just a 28.5er.

Twentyeightandahalfer? LOL :D

- Mornin'
- Mornin'
- Can I help ya?
- Yeah, got any twentyeightandahalfers in stock?
- Eh... beg ya pardon?

+1

This describes my feeling about them exactly. Maybe a person gets used to 29ers offroad, but to me it was obviously different, but not in a way I liked.

The only place I'd be tempted by a 29er is if someone built an old geometry MTB 29er for me to use as a tourer. Then I'd actually get the benefit from the larger wheels. In city, on my commute? The stop go would make the bigger wheels more work than my 26 inch wheels. If the roads weren't so rough here I'd consider going down to 20" wheels because of all the stop and go.

I'm 6'2" and big. I don't like the way 29er's bring my center of gravity even higher when I'm off-road. Amongst other things, see above.

Don't you people have gears?

29ers are proven in the MTB realm in the form of pro XC racing. All the top riders on the big factory teams ride 29ers. There is slight variation in terms of suspension usage, tread patterns, geometries, etc. But they all use 29ers.

That doesn't mean they are bad for the general public, but it does mean that there are real advantages to them. I've only ever ridden one in a parking lot and never on a trail, so I have no say and would personally love to try one. But for now I'm happy with 26ers. And when the time comes for 650b bikes to start blowing up (which will happen - count on it in about 3-5 years), I'll be happy to try those out too.

The advantage of 29"er
larger wheels roll over obstacles more easily due to decrease in approach angle
The larger diameter wheels have more angular momentum so they lose less speed to obstacles and rough sections
29" bikes tend to offer taller riders a more "natural" frame geometry
Long debates over how to conduct a "fair" test of the efficiency of 29" vs 26" mountain bikes have raged online, but no serious efforts have been made to conduct a large-scale, scientific study.

tonyjaya +1. Well said. Can o worms here. Like how my disc brakes are far superior to rim brakes. On my 29er, I sit between the wheels , not over them. I can climb better with my 29er, than with my 26 er. Much better for rolling the rocks and logs. For commuting, look at your standard hybrid, flat bars, 29er wheels, sort o fat tires. For your 29er/ 700 wheels, they travel farther per pedal stroke than a 26er. So one pedal stroke for your 26er to go one wheel revolution, vs 29er/ 700c goes farther. I bring the popcorn. YRMV. Ride waht you like.

I think a fully rigid 29er makes a fine commuter. Of all the bikes I've commuted on, this one has been my favorite thus far (for most year round condtions).

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=241997

I'll occasionally ride my 25mm-tired IGH conversion (nice summer days), but I have to be in the mood for it - the narrow tires and sportier geometry mean that I have to pay alot more attention to the road surface.

I really like rolling along with a good head of steam on my 700x50 Marathon Supremes. It is blissful, and the 700 (actually 28)x50's at 35-40 psi roll just fine - no sense or drag or rolling resistance.

In less than 30 minutes I can have my mild mannered commuter ready to hit the trails. Remove the rack and fenders (5 minutes) slap in the MTB front wheel, and install a MTB tire out back (10 min), then strip the commuting clutter (2 min) and I have a great offroad rig. No, I won't be winning any races on it but it is surprisingly adept on and off road.

One aim of manufacturers should be to ensure that every rider of a particular model has the same "rider experience". Imagine you on your 26" MTB and a 5'3" rider on the very smallest of the same model. Will you have the same experience? The smaller rider is much higher off the ground relative to their height, with a longer bike and their weight is further forward.

The rider centre of gravity is more dependant on bottom bracket height than hub height, and BB height is constant throughout the size range so the bigger you get, the lower you ride.

Putting the largest rider on 29" gives them a feel similar to med rider on med 26" MTB. If you dont like that feel, just sympathize with what MTBers have had to endure for the last 30 yrs. Bring on the 24er for med guys.

Boy, a lot of mis-perceptions and mis-information out there (and some good information and educated comments as well). Simply put, a 29er rolls faster and clears small obstacle more easily, speed equals wins in MTB racing. There are applications where 26" tires work better, but when racing cross country the 29er is ruling the day. And you ask why do downhill MTB racers still use 26" wheels? Surely they would benefit from a faster rolling wheel/tire. 29er wheels are just not stiff and strong enough for the abuse that a downhill course dishes out.

For commuters? It doesn't really matter a whole lot unless you have a really bumpy commute; ride what you like and like what you ride.

As someone has already stated, a 29er is a 700c wheel, and as someone else has correctly pointed out, unless it's a knobby it's not really a 29er but a 28er. The most technically correct nomenclature is a 622 wheel/tire which is the wheel/bead diameter where the wheel and tire interface.

From what I gathered there is only anecdotal evidence and no one actually measured any real-world gains from riding a 29-er. Not to say it's bad, but the real life benefit might not be what the manufacturers want us to believe.

Except at the end of the day, a professional racer is going to ride the bike that will best help them win. They don't care if it's 26, a 29 or a Penny Farthing; they simply want to win the race. In a discipline where energy savings and a few seconds per lap mean the difference between podium and "also ran", the pros will do/ride whatever it takes to not be the latter.

For the rest of us? Just doesn't matter that much.

Sure, like anything else you have to consider the source, and by this I mean that the writer earns his living in the cycling industry, but the article is worth reading.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2009/...e-faster_97597

+1 Well stated and true

For me and most of the mountain bikers who ride cross country, 29ers are a game changer. All the people I ride with, all who bought 29ers, have not gone back to 26ers. Go to mtbike forums for some " involved" discussions.

This scenario is actually no joke. People with 29er mountain bikes like to fit them with city/touring tires for commuting or around town riding. When we ship these, the box or tag will often say 28 x 2.00 (or whatever width). We invariably get a call "you guys sent us the wrong tires! I have a 29er and you sent me 28" tires..... WTF!?!?!? We have to calmly explain the situation and then everyone is happy..... usually.

For ordinary commuting on an MTB with wider tires, 26" wheels are better. Unless you are spending top dollar on the lightest, fastest tubeless 29" wheels/tires, the average 26" wheel, tube and tire combo will weigh substantially less and outperform the 29". If you really want to commute faster, get a light road bike with skinny tires. And get in better shape.

Seriously? Ha ha, I had no idea :)

Is this based on tests?

FWIW there was a debate long ago on which was better for tandem use, 700c or 26" wheels. The results after some testing were that the 700c wheels performed better and it came down to the longer contact patch that the bigger wheel provides.

Yes, riders who are in better shape have been proven time and time again in various tests to be faster.:D

If by some chance you were asking about the 26 vs 700c debate, it's just my opinion.

Of course. I also live in a very hilly city to boot.

+1.

I bought my first 29"er for my b-day back in '08...and eventually sold off all smaller wheel sizes (own a paitr of Vassago mtn bikes,700c CX bike...and a pair of 20"er folders). I'm 5'9" and 160 lbs give or take a crap.

Just cause I love em and they work for my riding style/habits/area doesn't mean they will for anyone else...ride what feels best to you :thumb: