moorey
call me Mia
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not evidence.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.
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not evidence.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.
Lol. Just imagine. The horror.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.
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.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.
Agreed, 27.5 was a way for companies to obsolete 26 without putting in the effort developing half decent 29ers (Giant).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.
Or eBiking. Go on, you know you want to.Christ, I’m glad most of my MTB life missed this shite.
Ima get my kids into roller blading.
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.Can somebody explain why 29ers are referred to as ‘clown wheels?’
Yeah. I’m sure it’s immune to standard changes.Or eBiking. Go on, you know you want to.
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...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.
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..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.
I struggle to stay upright. Though it’s nothing to do with wheel size or axle spacing.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.
Probably true, go straight to an MX bike and be done with it.Yeah. I’m sure it’s immune to standard changes.
hope I can pull 15 seconds.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.
If you’re like me, and happy with older frames, you don’t need to know...other than to avoid it.When 29 is dead, I'll go 27. Still don't know what boost is.