Wade's ride

This. And 650b is not 27.5".

29/700 x 650 = 26.92857141"

Who's my god now????????
:damn:

And 650b is not 27.5".

Rode with Wade again this week ,as I guided him around the beauty of Ledgeview with Margus and Sharon.
Wade has a killer sense of humor. Margus he was like a kid in a candy store as the fog rolled in.
I was wishing for better weather ,but Margus looked like he had just seen the promise land.
Rocky and RaceFace couldn't find a nicer laid back guy.
Gary

26" wheel has a 559mm ISO diameter
29" wheel has a 622mm ISO diameter

=

650b has a 584mm ISO diameter = 27"

interesting read:

SANTA CRUZ (Mike Ferrentino, whose comments were presumably vetted by suspension engineer Joe Graney, who is on the record as not looking forward to 650B): First, I do not entirely agree with (the premise that the industry is driving this). I think consumers are a big part of this interest bubble right now. According to francis at MTBR, “650b” is the second most popular search term on their site at the moment, and the 650b forum traffic is showing huge growth. It is valid to argue that the industry is at fault for even beginning to entertain the idea of 650b wheels, but consumers are clamouring right now for what they perceive to be the next better mousetrap. Another thing to consider – IF this takes off, does anyone realize how much crow the industry is going to have to eat listening to grant petersen saying “I told you so?”

Comparison from another angle. See below for tire models.

I think on the consumer side there is a desire for some sort of better mousetrap/magic bullet – a wheel size between 26? and 29? that will combine all the positive attributes of both into one bike that will do everything. That desire is a bit naive, but people go down that road all the time.

At the industry level, you’ve got the fading popularity of 26? wheels on hardtails and short travel xc applications butting headfirst into the very real packaging issues surrounding use of 29? wheels for long travel, high abuse riding. I think within the industry, for some companies at least, there’s also a pretty heavy fear of being left behind if the ‘tweener wheel takes off, and somehow becomes the miracle wheel that everyone defaults to. You know, some sort of amplified 1992 syndrome – fear of being left with a giant pile of 1? and 1.25? threaded headsets, right around the time that 1 1/8? threadless steerers became the industry default. Okay, maybe not.

[drops science and math]

oh right. in other news: 26" is not 26", and 29" is not 29"

http://sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html

Notice how Ferrentino didn't mention anything about how they ride?

It was his opinion on the debate…but nothing about putting tires to dirt. I am not saying he hasn't, but I don't think opinion on the why or why not based on companies jumping on a bandwagon has merit.

oh right. in other news: 26" is not 26", and 29" is not 29"

http://sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html

My point is that 650b is not directly in the middle of the 26 and 29" wheels. There is a belief out there that it is.

Well its less applicable in the rear a stiff front end does a buncha nice stuff, especially on the shore.

When deep in the travel if your suspension is even, or god forbid your back is harder, you are way more likely to get chucked otb. Having the front stiffer and thus ride higher effectively slackens the bike out as it goes through travel, which consequently makes the bike ride better in the steeps, makes you feel less exposed, and also helps you motor through big holes and compressions without tossing you.

A stiffer set up also lets you be far more nimble on the trail, letting you pre hop, snipe lines and be much more precise in your riding, as opposed to wallowing down the trail on a couch.

Finally it lets you ride the front wheel way harder, which lets you attack the trail, and gives you gobs more cornering traction.

stiff is legit!

My point is that 650b is not directly in the middle of the 26 and 29" wheels. There is a belief out there that it is.

The one inch difference is also why I am of the belief that 650b is a giant case of the placebo effect.

Well its less applicable in the rear a stiff front end does a buncha nice stuff, especially on the shore.

When deep in the travel if your suspension is even, or god forbid your back is harder, you are way more likely to get chucked otb. Having the front stiffer and thus ride higher effectively slackens the bike out as it goes through travel, which consequently makes the bike ride better in the steeps, makes you feel less exposed, and also helps you motor through big holes and compressions without tossing you.

A stiffer set up also lets you be far more nimble on the trail, letting you pre hop, snipe lines and be much more precise in your riding, as opposed to wallowing down the trail on a couch.

Finally it lets you ride the front wheel way harder, which lets you attack the trail, and gives you gobs more cornering traction.

stiff is legit!

Everyone seems to be forgetting that stiff comes from 2 things in a fork or rear shock. A stiff spring is much different than a stiffly set compression damper. It is a real art to get a proper balance of the two. Some of us look for performance, while some of us look for comfort while most of us look for the middle ground.

Nick, if your still hanging on this thread, I honestly never check my pressure but I'm lucky to have a gauge surgically implanted in my arm and it's accurate as hell! Really though, I just give it a pinch and adjust accordingly…try running your tires hard man, it's a hoot!
Gary, thanks again for the great Ledgeview extravaganza! That place absolutely rocks, and Riga was coming un-glued with the perfect light conditions eh!
Currently I swap regularly between a 120/100mm 24.5lbs 29er and a 150/150mm 28.5lbs 27.5/650bs and enjoy both! If I have an hour and a half to go get a shred on, the 29er is my go to hands down; it's so goddamn efficient and quite shreddable(no problem hitting all lines on Ladies Only - but def sketchy on Lower Ladies) , If I'm doing a longer slow pace Sat/Sun ride with some bros where we'll be hitting things a bit gnarlier, I like the 27.5. I'm willing to say that the 27.5 ride characteristic is closer to a 26 than 29. It's easy to redirect, and this, I find, is one of the biggest faults of the 29; hard to quick adjust a line when committed. I'm still in the getting-to-know stage of the 27.5, but so far I have not found a reason to go back to a 26. Except for the DH rig!! Sh#t, can't wait til that changes….

My point is that 650b is not directly in the middle of the 26 and 29" wheels.

ah, i'm with you there. the whole "gotta call it 27.5 'cuz otherwise mountain bikers is gonna get confuzed" line of thinking is a pointless condescension

If I have an hour and a half to go get a shred on, the 29er is my go to hands down; it's so goddamn efficient and quite shreddable(no problem hitting all lines on Ladies Only - but def sketchy on Lower Ladies)

Major confidence boost knowing I can sort-of make my way down Lower Ladies on my 29er when Wade says this. :D

I watched a video last night (Sea of Rocks I think it was called) with 5 minutes of good ol' fashioned euro all-mountain-trials riding. It left me wanting to crank up the pressure in my fork and shock.

I can see why Wade would run high tire pressure - it's faster rolling, and he doesn't spend enough time on any one surface to actually lose traction. I ride more like a trials rider (slow as hell) so I need the lower pressure.