Weight Weenies enter here.

yawn.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/pro-bike-willow-koerbers-subaru-trek-trek-superfly-elite

she's 5'2"

She's also paid to ride that bike…..

29er are just a phase, and not all of us are 6' tall. I rode a 29er and it was way too tall and goofy for me. I am 5'10".
My 26er is way more flick-able.

Posted via Mobile Device

I have no doubt that you like your 26 inch wheels better, but it is hard to argue against what the manufacturers are offering and what greater percentage of riders are asking for. Just because you don't see many in BC or you personally don't like them, doesn't mean that they aren't more popular and more practical.

I don't ride a 29er either. I like my 26" wheels, mostly because I like to get off the ground quite often. But, if I hada true, dedicated XC bike, it would be a 29er.

What about short people? They don't fit 29'ers at all. I will never buy a 29'er, nor will a lot of people who ride XC, so I don't get your reasoning. For huge people it makes sense, but they need to make the geo relative to its size. Stop making them twitchy and fit like a 26" bike.

See L.Ron. Hubbard's and Connor's posts.

She's also paid to ride that bike…..

this!

Look at all the parts the pro's have told us are good and how they love them, only to buy then and find out they are shit.

First gen SPV, Hayes El Camenos, giant NRS [HTML_REMOVED] ATX, Norco 420, grip shift, 3.0 tires, Kona, Pink Bike, Shitmano rapid rise, dual control, 1st gen XT disc [HTML_REMOVED] bio pace, Cory L, latex tubes, etc

Posted via Mobile Device

OK sure the frame size can accommodate smaller people, but its still designed with weird geometry and huge monster truck wheels. If for whatever reason you are into XC hardtails and the bike rode well then I suppose a 29'er would make sense. I would just buy a 26" fully with good angles instead, but that's just me.

Like I said earlier though, huge guys would do well on 29'ers as long as the head angles weren't fucked.

Recently I've been trying out different 29'ers that my shop loans me while I wait for my bikes to return from warranty.

I'm now a believer (although with the same caveat as kperras). If I had the $$ to afford a pure xc bike to fill out my stable it would 100% be a 29'er.

29'er wheels really smooth out the small stuff and make short travel bikes more comfortable. I haven't found them to be super confident descenders, but for rolling singletrack they're great.

I'm with Erik and kperras, though at 6'3" I'm not really doing anything to dispel the myth that 29ers are only for tall people. As a pure xc machine, a 29er makes a lot of sense. The problem is there isn't much opportunity to use a pure xc machine here in Vancouver. On the Island, I notice they're a lot more popular.

I'd be curious to try one in an AM guise, but I think the lack of choice of tyres/rims would put me off at the moment.

OK sure the frame size can accommodate smaller people, but its still designed with weird geometry and huge monster truck wheels. If for whatever reason you are into XC hardtails and the bike rode well then I suppose a 29'er would make sense. I would just buy a 26" fully with good angles instead, but that's just me.

Like I said earlier though, huge guys would do well on 29'ers as long as the head angles weren't fucked.

What constitutes "fucked up" geometry for a 29er?

What constitutes "fucked up" geometry for a 29er?

Super steep head angle and twitchy steering. Probably not all are like that I'm sure, but the ones I know of are just weird to ride.

I have a question… why aren't there more dh bikes with 29" wheels? Its seems that a bike designed to hit stuff hard while being maxed out at ~8" travel would benefit from bigger wheels no? Anyone want to tackle that?

yawn.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/pro-bike-willow-koerbers-subaru-trek-trek-superfly-elite

she's 5'2"

yawn. I only see pictures of the bike, not the legs powering it.

I have a question… why aren't there more dh bikes with 29" wheels? Its seems that a bike designed to hit stuff hard while being maxed out at ~8" travel would benefit from bigger wheels no? Anyone want to tackle that?

Super steep head angle and twitchy steering. Probably not all are like that I'm sure, but the ones I know of are just weird to ride.

I have a question… why aren't there more dh bikes with 29" wheels? Its seems that a bike designed to hit stuff hard while being maxed out at ~8" travel would benefit from bigger wheels no? Anyone want to tackle that?

Have you ever ridden a real XC bike? They also have twitchy steering and super steep head angles. It's all relative.

Anyways, to be more precise, one important figure to look at when figuring out if a bike will steer well is the bike's trail angle. 29ers have steeper head angles so that their trail distance stays the same as a 26" bike. Pretty standard stuff really.

I could go on and on about why there are no DH 29ers yet, but I'd rather not waste my time. They will become more popular, just you wait. It took around 8-10 years for 29ers to become mainstream in XC.

No one is saying they will take over every discipline, but they are better suited to some, like XC!

Oh, and some hard geo numbers to back up your quote from earlier would be good. Otherwise, I'm led to believe that you're just saying 29ers suck, but have no evidence to support that argument.

Anyways, to be more precise, one important figure to look at when figuring out if a bike will steer well is the bike's trail angle. 29ers have steeper head angles so that their trail distance stays the same as a 26" bike. Pretty standard stuff really.

wtf is trail angle

wtf is trail angle

orly!???!!!

orly!???!!!

how did you do that? that was cool!