27.5 is dead

358227
 
Everyone thought they were being sold a bill of goods with Boost spacing, but I bet you’d hate to ride a bike with the old spacing standard.
Click to expand...
Lol. Just imagine. The horror.
Idiot.
 
LPG said:
Nothing wrong with 27.5 as such but once you have 2 relevant wheel sizes it seemed pretty ridiculous to add a third. There really isn't that big a difference between 26 and 29 that you needed a middle ground. Not when you can change suspension, tyre width, geometry etc.
Click to expand...

And the same with rear spacing, they discussed it years ago and came to the conclusion that 157mm Trail was where they should be at... but a quick stop at 148mm would generate more cash.
 
LPG said:
Nothing wrong with 27.5 as such but once you have 2 relevant wheel sizes it seemed pretty ridiculous to add a third. There really isn't that big a difference between 26 and 29 that you needed a middle ground. Not when you can change suspension, tyre width, geometry etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed, 27.5 was a way for companies to obsolete 26 without putting in the effort developing half decent 29ers (Giant).

26 and 29 are perfectly fine and serve the whole market, no need for this inbetween bullshit.

Boost as well, 157mm is where its at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Go
Can somebody explain why 29ers are referred to as ‘clown wheels?’

358233


I always thought the clowns rode the little wheels @moorey?
 
Can’t we just round all those sizes up to an even 30?
I prefer 29er and it feels like I am going faster but strava tells me my old 26er was actually faster on my local.
 
Tubbsy said:
Can somebody explain why 29ers are referred to as ‘clown wheels?’
Click to expand...

I thought they were known as 'wagon wheels' because everyone likes a good western, particularly if Clint Eastwood and Lee Van Cleef are out toting shotguns.
 
slimjim1 said:
Agreed, 27.5 was a way for companies to obsolete 26 without putting in the effort developing half decent 29ers (Giant).

26 and 29 are perfectly fine and serve the whole market, no need for this inbetween bullshit.

Boost as well, 157mm is where its at.
Click to expand...
Interestingly Giant went 29er and won a bike of the year award from a UK magazine before declaring 29” was shit and they were going all 27.5”. Then they back flipped on their backflip and went 29 again...
 
SummitFever said:
The writer sounds like a peanut. I like this quote in particular "Everyone thought they were being sold a bill of goods with Boost spacing, but I bet you’d hate to ride a bike with the old spacing standard. "

Yeah, I hate riding my non-boost bikes... How on earth did anyone manage to actually stay upright before the invention of 29" wheels and boost. It's a miracle we're all still alive.
Click to expand...

I just swapped to a boost bike, cannot tell the difference at all. The end caps on my dt swiss wheels look like they take up most of the extra 6mm boost width..
 
SummitFever said:
Yeah, I hate riding my non-boost bikes... How on earth did anyone manage to actually stay upright before the invention of 29" wheels and boost. It's a miracle we're all still alive.
Click to expand...
I struggle to stay upright. Though it’s nothing to do with wheel size or axle spacing.
 
The mountain bike industry is looking like it's starting to be led by the roadie types that just upgrade for the sake of upgrading, even the farkin trails are starting to resemble the footpaths. Yeah great news everybody, get on your faster and safer bike :D.
 
T-Rex said:
The safety comment is drawing a bit of a long bow given the nature of MTB. Can’t refute the rest of it though.

In particular: “the stopwatch tells no lies”. I’ve proven this one in a back to back test on the flow trail at Thredbo, 29 was 15 sec faster than 27.5.
Click to expand...
hope I can pull 15 seconds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top