29er. Wow, a revelation...

[millemille]

Just got back from an emtb session around Ladybower with a mate.

He was on his Whyte E160 and I hired, as I sold my Trek Powerfly back in the summer, a Trek Rail 5 from the Bike Garage in Bamford. I was vaguely aware that the Rail was a 29er but didn't give it much thought until I first laid eyes on it.

I expected it to feel, well I'm not sure what I expected, maybe kind of like hanging on to a giraffe as it would be all tall and teetery tottery or a bit distant and disconnected from the front wheel.

After 5 hours of Peak District gnar all I can say is WOW! 29" wheels are fucking awesome. So, so much better at rolling over anything and everything thrown at them and handling was great, sooooo much more grip.

In short my next bike is definitely going to be a 29er.

[weeksy]

Interesting, I've owned plenty of both, in 29ers I think I've had 4-5, the best being a commencal am29. I always prefer 27.5 though in anything technical myself.

I have noticed though there's a resurgence of them in the market of new bikes now. Which troubles me slightly as I can't see me going 29.

My HT is a 29er but it very very rarely goes outside

[millemille]

It may be that the Peak District terrain - rocky and rutted, lots of up and down with no smooth or singletrack sections to speak off - flatters the 29" wheel.

The Whyte (belonging to Jamie Porter of PBmagforum) that Jamie has been riding predominantly in Epping Forest, his local patch in Essex, since he bought it a few weeks has - in his words - been awesome. But it was hateful in the Peak District; the bottom bracket was just too low* so the pedals were clanging off everything and the geometry/suspension couldn't cope very well with the super rocky rough downhills (which kind of mirrors my experience with my Amish HT & FS whytes). So maybe the terrain has a bigger impact on how well wheel size/frame design performs than the wheel size itself?


*I think Whyte themselves are recognising that this is a problem with their 27.5" wheel ebike geometry as they're advising riders to only run 20% sag on the front and they've got a new shock linkage that lifts the bike by 10mm on the way. From what I've read and seen Whyte went for handling over all else and have the motor and battery lower than anyone else, by some margin, to get the centre of mass down low and perhaps they've gone too far? I wonder if the Whyte 29" emtb has the same frame as the 27.5" so the BB is 15mm or so higher?

[weeksy]

Deffo regarding low BBs yes, my g160 is about a foot lower than the 29er.

A lot of the Whyte bikes are designed for both sizes yes

[Rp1]

It may be that the Peak District terrain - rocky and rutted, lots of up and down with no smooth or singletrack sections to speak off - flatters the 29" wheel.

The Whyte (belonging to Jamie Porter of PBmagforum) that Jamie has been riding predominantly in Epping Forest, his local patch in Essex, since he bought it a few weeks has - in his words - been awesome. But it was hateful in the Peak District; the bottom bracket was just too low* so the pedals were clanging off everything and the geometry/suspension couldn't cope very well with the super rocky rough downhills (which kind of mirrors my experience with my Amish HT & FS whytes). So maybe the terrain has a bigger impact on how well wheel size/frame design performs than the wheel size itself?


*I think Whyte themselves are recognising that this is a problem with their 27.5" wheel ebike geometry as they're advising riders to only run 20% sag on the front and they've got a new shock linkage that lifts the bike by 10mm on the way. From what I've read and seen Whyte went for handling over all else and have the motor and battery lower than anyone else, by some margin, to get the centre of mass down low and perhaps they've gone too far? I wonder if the Whyte 29" emtb has the same frame as the 27.5" so the BB is 15mm or so higher?

Bugger have the same bike as your mate and am off to the peaks tomorrow with it
Will report back and let you know how I got on !

[Beancounter]

.... the best being a commencal am29. I always prefer 27.5 though in anything technical myself.

That Meta is almost thuggish at the way batters the trail, you get the impression rocks and roots move out of the bike’s way.

My T-130 is livelier and encourages/rewards better riding. I guess it’s a similar comparison to learning to ride a 250 2T quickly as opposed to jumping on an R1 and going fast.

[MingtheMerciless]

I went straight to 29ers from 26 after a charity MTB race, my team had a mix of bikes and one was a 29er race HT on full mud tyres, I'd elected skinnies and my 26 alu race HT (known as the polystyrene bicycle it was so light). Slipstreaming my mate on his 29er with the mud tyres I was having to pedal to keep up as he was rolling.

I've been on 29ers ever since. They roll so much better and climb out of ruts where 26 would have you flat on your face. I definitely notice they don't spin up/accelerate as quickly as 27.5/650b but they carry/maintain speed better. I've got a 29 FS specky Enduro that absolutely steam rollers everything and being the 2015 model it has an unfashionably high BB which means it does not scrape it and pedal strike to death when you play on big rocky natural stuff. This was really highlighted on a trip to Dartmoor and the Nutcracker Stones descent, my mate on a 650b Nomad gave up following my lines as he was scraping the paint off his BB on every rock (admittedly I was pushing my luck seeing what the Enduro could get away with).

For my local riding on the Sarf Dahns and Friston there are maybe two or three bits on singletrack where 27.5 nimbleness pays off but the rest of the time 29ers are quicker.

Mrs M summed it up when she upgraded from her Cube Stereo EMTB which was 27.5 to a Speccy Levo on 29ers "It's cheating"

[weeksy]

Just for you, I've fitted off road tyres and gearing on the Parkwood today for a ride in half an hour.

[Mr Moofo]

I have a 27.5 wheeled HT and a 29er FS. Whist the HT is considerably lighter, the FS feels much quicker, and Strava times would sort of support this.
These days , riding the 27.5 feels like I am dragging something behind (did ride it on Friday, just to check- ....

[porter_jamie]

Right. So i didnt really enjoy the dh parts of the peak simply because i was pulling the brake levers as hard as i possibly could, and it wasnt slowing down. it was bloody miserable to be honest. the front suspension also felt really harsh - running 25% sag and had the compression fully off. i had a few pedal strikes but to be honest it was the least of my problems. i had my arms locked fully pulling for all my worth, so i imagine that didnt do the ride any good.

rode all the way up haggside and the slabs without stopping which has obviously never happened before.

brakes - codes, supposed to be full on dh brakes and they were utter dogshite. im assuming the pads were contaminated, so i've not given up on it yet.
suspension - rc lyriks,so the basic ones. i need to play with tyre pressures and maybe 30% sag, but then the BB will be even lower.

me and the missus run guide 4 pots on our normal bikes and they are brilliant. however, thinking about it, i run shimano disks on my bird...

and for some context, on my bird im usually the one waiting for everyone at the bottom of the run, but i was riding like complete muppet - having to stop a few times on the way down to give my hands a rest as i couldn't stand holding the brakes on any more.

round epping in the tight and flowing single track its an absolute beast, i can lean on the front tyre so hard and the handling is much better than the bird tbh.

got back to the van and the trek has a flat battery, and the whyte still had 2 bars, so mighty impressive.

[weeksy]

I did 50m on the 29er yesterday after fitting new tyres, wheels, cassette and chainring... it's just horrible/different compared to my G-160. I then put it in the garage and rode 40km on the G160

[millemille]

got back to the van and the trek has a flat battery, and the whyte still had 2 bars, so mighty impressive.

Not surprising, given the Trek had a 500wh battery opposed to your 625wh battery....

[porter_jamie]

maybe - 625/5=125. 125x3=375.
it must have been just on the verge of going to 4 bars used (125*4=500)

[lostboy]

Still run a 29 HT for mile munching and a 26 (yes, you read right) FS for fun stuff. Still haven't found a 27.5 that's as responsive and fun pointed downwards and the 29er (Moofo's old Solaris, so steel framed) is just so comfortable and easy to rack up distance without fuss.

[weeksy]

I expected it to feel, well I'm not sure what I expected, maybe kind of like hanging on to a giraffe as it would be all tall and teetery tottery or a bit distant and disconnected from the front wheel.

That's exactly how the Parkwood felt when i got on it yesterday... I was quite shocked. The bars felt crazy narrow, even though they're not...it just felt very wrong and it went straight back on the trainer.

[mboy]

I expected it to feel, well I'm not sure what I expected, maybe kind of like hanging on to a giraffe as it would be all tall and teetery tottery or a bit distant and disconnected from the front wheel.

That's exactly how the Parkwood felt when i got on it yesterday... I was quite shocked. The bars felt crazy narrow, even though they're not...it just felt very wrong and it went straight back on the trainer.

You're confusing plenty of other factors that make the bike less confidence inspiring to ride, with the wheel size, when compared to your G-160...

I've never owned a 27.5" bike, and I won't either. I guess Mullet with a 27.5 rear may happen at some point especially if I get a long travel enduro bike as that does seem to be the way that is going, but you couldn't prize my 29er wheels out of my cold dead hands quite frankly! They're just so much faster and grippier everywhere, for very little trade off. The only minor downside that I experience is that they're slightly slower to accelerate, but I'm not a 4X racer so that's not really an issue anyway.

[weeksy]

You're confusing plenty of other factors that make the bike less confidence inspiring to ride, with the wheel size, when compared to your G-160...

Oh i get that absolutely, but it's not like that's the only 29er i've owned or ridden.

MEta AM29
Giant XTC29
Salsa Spearfish x 2
Parkwood 29.

So i've ridden a fair few and i agree they're all quite different to the G160, but even back then i was 'into' 29ers and still always felt a little perched and distanced from the bike itself.

[Couchy]

Interesting I hated my 29er orbea as it was just crude and no finesse just a monster truck. By comparison my whyte handles far better and is a lot more accurate. Tbh though fir fat runs at local trail place I’ve been running it locked out as I like the direct feel with short travel. However I’ve also got the 170mm kit for the front and I’m gonna give that a go and may add the longer rear link too.
Tbh I’d prob be happy with a short bike on fast rolling tyres as most of my riding suits that sort of bike