Talking 650B DH Bikes with Trek
Rotorua, New Zealand
650B SESSION
WORDS Mike Levy
PHOTOS John Colthorpe
Three of the top four racers at the NZ Champs were on 650B wheeled bikes. Does that count for anything in the real world, a place where the average rider or racer isn't yet sold on 'tweener wheels for their downhill bike? The answer is that yes, it does, despite 26" stalwarts seemingly outnumbering those with more open minds by at least four to one. It matters because their sponsors chose the New Zealand National Championships as a race-focused testing ground for bikes that have already seen quite a lot of development, and that will eventually be added to their production lineup. You know the old saying: Race On Sunday, Sell On Monday. Would the results have been any different if they had been on 26" wheels? Maybe, or maybe not, but it doesn't matter because the bikes that the top riders were on is indicative of what we'll be seeing relatively soon in our local shops. Having said that, one fact is clear after having talked to a number of top racers: they want to be on whatever bike allows them to go faster, and many who have tested on the mid-sized wheels simply feel faster on them.
Trek World Racing's George Brannigan took the win on Sunday, piloting his prototype 650B wheeled Session down the hill just over half a second faster than Lapierre's Sam Blenkinsop, making for one hell of a bike debut when you consider that his teammate, Brook Macdonald, took his own 650B Session to fourth. The bike is far from being a special run of handmade aluminum machines, though, with its brand new carbon fiber frame making it clear that Trek is well along in the bike's development. ''We committed to creating a 650B Session prior to last year’s 2013 World Cup season,'' Travis Ott, Trek's MTB Brand Manager, told Pinkbike. ''It took this long to get it under the riders because we needed to ensure all the pieces were in place: frame, wheels, tires, and suspension.'' And what about the racers? Was it a struggle to get them onboard? ''They were all very interested in it and anxious to test it,'' he went on to say. ''They wanted to prove to themselves if it was faster and what the differences really were.''
 | It's a massive difference. I did a couple of runs on the 26" bike first, and then my first run on the 650B was a whole new ball game. I noticed so much more rolling speed, and I couldn't feel all the little bumps as much. It's good, and I think that it's going to be the future. - Brook Macdonald, Trek World Racing |
 |
 There are differences in geometry between the 26" and 650B wheeled bikes, but Trek worked to keep the chain stay length the same between the two. |
The 650B Session is an all new frame from the ground up. That means that the front and rear triangles are different from what is currently offered to the public on the 26" wheeled bike, and that goes for both aesthetics and functional changes that determine how the bike performs. ''The geometry is adjusted not only for the bigger wheels, but to make updates and improvements to the bike that we would have made regardless of wheel size,'' says Dylan Howes, Trek's MTB Lead Frame & Suspension Engineer. ''Although the layout is similar to the current bike, the suspension kinematics have been updated.'' These changes came as a result of requests from their World Cup racers, a fact that highlights the role that a top team can play in a bike's development. And while rear wheel travel remains the same, other factors have been updated. ''The biggest component of that was just a little more bottom out resistance, with the key there being not changing the current off-the-top plushness. There were some other considerations and components at play here, but we’ll save those for now...''
While Howes is still holding some of his cards close to his chest in regards to the Session's incremental suspension improvements, he's much more open about the 650B bike's geometry relative to what is used now on the production bike. Is it different? It certainly has to be, as you can't simply bolt on a set of larger diameter wheels and expect the bike to handle well, especially one that is being raced by some of the fastest riders in the world. Not all of the bike's numbers have changed, though, with both travel and rear - center (chain stay) length remaining constant. ''On a downhill race bike, simply having the shortest chain stays isn’t the best option. So, with careful design and adjustment to parts, we kept the chain stay length the same,'' Howes clarifies. What has changed, then? Bottom bracket drop, the height of the bottom bracket relative to an imaginary line connecting the front and rear axles, is the important one, with it sitting lower compared to the 26" wheeled bike. However, the bottom bracket-to-ground height is actually the same as what is found on the current production bike, something that is due to the slightly larger diameter wheels. This should offer a more
"sitting in" sort of feel on the trail, much like what you'll find when on a properly designed 29er. The bike's reach has also been extended slightly, although Howes told us that this isn't something that is specific to the 650B platform. A number that doesn't differ from the 26" bike is the head tube angle, although he is quick to point out that a longer fork offset has be utilized to keep the handling between the 26" and 650B machines as close as possible. |
| The 650B bike's suspension kinematics are different than that of the 26'' wheeled bike, although rear wheel travel remains the same. The shock on Brook's bike is likely a near-production version of the FOX RAD shock that we saw used at last year's World Championships. |
Does this spell the end of the 26" wheeled Session? The answer to that questions depends on if you're a Trek World Racing team member or someone who is going to buy their own Session from a local shop, and it might be the opposite of what you're thinking. ''We’ve been testing 650B with all the riders, and the NZ National Champs was on our radar as a public rollout,'' Ott told us. ''They’re all anxious to get more competition time on the bike. After this past weekend’s New Zealand results, the riders will start the transition from 26'' to 650B from here forward. For the sake of consistency, confidence and our own ability to support them fully, we’re planning on running 650B exclusively this season.'' That's more commitment than an arranged marriage, but it doesn't mean that the average consumer is going to be held to the same expectations. After all, the 2014, 26" wheeled production lineup was set in stone a long time ago, likely before Trek committed to developing a 650B Session, and potential Session owners won't be able to choose the larger wheel size this year even if they wanted to.
It looks like 2015 could be the year of choices, though, with it sounding very much like Trek will give consumers the option of picking the wheel size that they prefer, something that they already do for their Fuel trail bike (26" and 29" wheels) and Remedy (650B and 29'') platforms: ''I can confidently say that there will be a 26” Session next year, but there is room to create more distinction between a 26” DH rig and a 650B DH rig,'' stated Ott when asked what consumers could expect to see. ''There has to be a more satisfying reason to buy a different bike than just a slightly bigger wheel.''
 |
| The 2015 production version of the 650B Session frame, which is a safe bet at this point, will likely resemble the bike that Brook raced at the 2014 New Zealand National Championships in everything but colour. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
41959 views
41959 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
I think 650's cool and helps roll over things a bit easier. Might be especially noticeable in rock gardens. It could help roll over things where more travel might help in the case of a 26" tire. But smaller tires get caught up in gaps and a bigger tire would have less chance of that. It might not be a huge night and day difference, but I can see why it's catching on. I'm open to it. Not likely I'll have a bike with it very soon though.
At the end of the day a 26" with good geometry will beat a 650b with bad geometry
Everything you learned in physics (as an engineer) tells you 29" is better?
You can't have learnt very much in physics then....(as an engineer)
What does physics thell you (as an engineer) about how quickly a larger wheel will change direction (as an engineer)?
Steering axis is the same, gyroscopic effect is negligible, wheels have very little effect on direction changes.
As far as my spelling... apart from the obvious typo that is "thell" please feel free to point out all my other obviously numerous spelling and/or grammar mistakes.
IMO the hype is just that..hype(how many more bikes have companies sold now due to trends?). There is a huge difference when going to 29 and therefore I will never own one due to my style of riding..good for some, not me!
I plan to do wheel swaps with my bikes and really test the feel and see if anything really stands out, but where I currently stand I'm still a 26 guy and don't see that changing anytime soon.
Gabriel-mission, I look at your profile I see a a majority of your comments picking apart others opinions, facts, and or comments on an article. No profile picture, no age, no bio, no pictures/videos, and not even a location. At this point i'll just step away, stop commenting, towards both of you, and keep doing what I do in life. I'll all do that on a future 650B DH bike that I will own and you can drown in your own sorrow that MTB has moved to 650B and or 29er, whether it be for trend, or the fact that a lot of research is put into the evolution of bike components thus the reason we have different wheel sizes. The majority of people who don't accept new product sizes are quite arrogant to the research behind the new production and just like to complain about progression rather than ride. Usually having an empty profile besides comments attacking peers who ride. In the end, i'm going to have loads of fun riding a 650B bike in the future for DH and yes, being an engineer as well.
How did Schirter beat all those scientifically, factually faster 29ers? Still waiting for an answer.
Mass distribution which is at least as influential as geometry is fundamentally different between a 26" and 29" and effects the handling far more than wheel size. The larger wheels simply give the benefit of lower rolling resistance and a small increase in traction.
Three Books and everyone freaked out. Now three wheels and everyone is freaking out.
Most of my comments are indeed picking apart what other people have commented and pointing out my views and how they differ. In the past (before the internet broke human interaction) this was called "a discussion". They can be quite interesting and informative. Please don't think that just cos I disagree with you, that I must therefor want to destroy you and everything you believe in. This is not the case. Nor will I look at your profile hunting for ammo to use against you in my character assaination. I just want to talk about the technical side of mtb with other people whole like to discuss the same sort of thing. (as an engineer)(or perhaps just as a human)
I have no issue with larger wheels. I own some myself. My issue is that if everyone buying a new bike believes the (sometimes true, sometimes utter bull) hype, companies will stop making 26". Then when most people out there are onto the bigger wheels, tracks will (d)evolve into wider, straighter versions of their former selves. They may get rougher, they may not, but the more cumbersome wheels WILL lead to less sharp corners or any terrain that requires a very nimble bike. In my head this is a terrible thing. No other evolution of our sport (hydraulics, more gears, wider bars etc) has come with so many built in drawbacks (as well as its numerous advantages) nor been accepted so widely in such a short space of time, before people have had the time to work out the truth from the hype.
@Sithbike:
You
Sir
Are
Sooooooooo
Correct.
I'm glad there are people out there who feel like me. +100000props if I could
First time I tested out a 27.5 I noticed a HUGE difference. Either you're 6'5 with long ass legs or you've never been on a 27.5 bike.
To the original post:
First time I tested out a 27.5 I noticed a HUGE difference. Either you're 6'5 with long ass legs or you've never been on a 27.5 bike.
flag gabriel-mission9 (20 hours ago)
Were the 27.5's the only difference? ie, same bike with the wheels swapped out, or totally different bike with more modern geo?
My comment was in response to LiquidSpin, not a question about the trek.
We tested out his new ride specifically on climbs, bumpy rock gardens and rooty sections. I did notice an improvement in these sections. I'd say I gained about a half second to a full second of speed vs. my 26".
I also noticed I was not as quick in a few of the turns such as switchbacks. Although, it could've been his handlebar size because he does have a wider bar.
I will say this...going from a 29er down to a 26" bike I currently ride now there is a massive difference. Going from a 26" ride to a 27.5 there is a difference and it is something I felt not just a little bit but a whole lot actually. I got to ride a 27.5 for about 5 miles and I can honestly say that I felt quicker, albeit slower on turns. I think if I owned one I would quickly get comfortable with handling sharper turns.
It's funny that their World Cup racers are racing it but they won't have it on the market till at least 2015. The bike companies, especially the big ones, have as dilemma with 650b and the result will be less profit. Many 26 owners are taking a wait and see approach to 650b, so they will hang on to the old 26 for a couple more years. The big companies like Trek and Specialized have their production runs so far planned out, they can't get them on the market anytime soon for the people who might want them, but they are investing money into testing and developing them.
The EWS and World Champs were won on 26" wheels. All the magazines and web sites give big hype to 650b. Customers are confused. Bike shops are frustrated over having to explain the confusion and stock more wheels and tires. Bike companies aren't selling as many bikes because of all the confusion and indecision. I'm not buying a new bike anytime soon, just parts for the old 26. Plus, most of the new bikes have the crappy PressFit BB's anyways.
It's gonna hurt the industry bad. You heard it here first.
"The 2015 production version of the 650B Session frame ...will likely resemble the bike that Brook raced at the 2014 New Zealand National Championships in everything but colour."
...I hope you don't mean that.
They weren't bad enough to make a decision based on it, there are other factors which are a lot bigger than, what 40mm (?) of rim diameter. Not like 29 which I hated and wouldn't buy.
Most people have actually tried the different wheel sizes and made their decision based on that. I am 6'4", my height doesn't affect the way a wheel responds to steering or terrain.
There has to be a good reason for that, correct?
Would a brand try and sell 'new' over 'better'. Hell yeh it happens all the time, functional and visual product churn is a much greater stimulator of sales than subtlely 'better'. Especially when as in this case it probably isn't better or only is on some courses. Add in the fact that most races last year were won by good chunks of change and 'marginal' looks like even less of a compelling reason to change. If you're not competitive 650 won't make you competitive all of a sudden.
That 5% larger, smoother rolling, heavier, more easily deforming, more difficult to steer wheel set might not be the panacea some claim. Will it feel different, absolutely it will, will that translate to faster, who knows?
To be honest I'm amazed no wheel or tyre manufacturer has yet produced the result of a rollover test for larger wheel sizes. They all have the machines to do it, big ass drum attached to a motor with steps/edges on it and a wheel resting against it. Just set it running and measure the current over time required to drive the motor to work out which wheel rolls more smoothly and by exactly how much.
I'm not wedded to my 26" wheels but I am suspicious of any claim not backed up by numerical facts. Sick looking bike though.
I think this is really what is fuelling all the big wheel haters - nobody wants to have a new product forced on them that is hardly any different to the product they currently own but nonetheless and assuredly completely incompatible with it and therefore advertised as 'better' because of this...
26" suspended bike have better axle path than 650b ones (because more bb drop and smaller chainring on 650B). So instead of rolling better over obstacles, 26" suspended bikes absorb them better than 650b. So depending on the bikes, 26" can be faster than 27,5".
Just because they didn't email you the results does't mean that each and every race team didn't have some kind of metric telling them it was the way to go. The stakes are too high for them to develop something that is no different, or as you are implying, potentially slower.
How does chainring size affect the axle path?
BB drop for that matter? Trek can't put the main pivot in the same place relative to the wheel axle? That seems like an easy engineering exercise.
How do you conclude that the 26 has the "better" suspension, and not the 650b?
In short yes. Bikes aren't exclusively designed by the marketing department of course but they are designed to be sold and make money. Even the testing a WC team can do with a few riders will not be conclusive one way or another- more data and more control than is possible is required to test the differences between wheel sizes. So long as it isn't noticeably worse the pros will ride whatever and sing the praises
Main pivot location affect the "kickback". If you put a smaller chainring, and if you have more bb drop, you need to lower the main pivot if you don't want too much kickback.
You do realize that 650b is only one inch larger in diameter than 26", considering the same tires, right?
Do you really think that such a beast couldn't be tamed on some technical terrain? What do you think is going to hold a skilled rider back?
BTW, have you ridden a 650b dh bike, or any bike?
I think the "isn't noticeably worse" is an over simplification. Obviously, bike are way simpler machines.
A couple of bikes (Kona Process, Nukeproof Mega, Lapierre Spicy), they handled almost exactly the same as my 26" bike, but others had a very vague steering feel (Giant Trance SX, Norco Sight, Trek Remedy) it felt slow to change direction for the first 5-10° then a very quick and sudden change of direction.
I think the early efforts of some of the manufacturers havn't quite got the geometry dialled as yet.
I was adamant that I would be sticking with 26", but when the opportunity came to update my ride, 650b became the logical option. It came down to which bikes gave the same feeling as my 26" (who has got their geometry dialled in yet?)
There always gets to be a point marketing any product that it starts to stagnate. Tech has advanced steeply in the last 2 decades but is now starting to plateau. What to do with so many refined 26" bikes rocking tubeless wheels, carbon bits, and hydro discs. Bikes that only need the occasional derailleur hanger bought or wheel trued? Relegate them obsolete!
I only take comfort in the fact that the open online market will perpetually support 26" wheel machines, and that garden variety MTB Joe tends to be a thrifty fellow less than interested in fads. 29" was enough to be a genuinely different machine. Will it take half inch wheel increments for us to call it a money grab.
Actually, that joke is starting to not work at all. (it was funny the first 500x)
I used to ride a 24" a few years back, made the jump up to 26" and noticed it was smoother and faster. I would imagine 650b will be even smoother and even faster.
There doesn't seem to be any direct comparison though. It would be a good idea to send one of the riders out to do some timed runs down a track on a 26" one day, and then do the same on a 650b the next day and directly compare the individual lap times and also compare the average times to see if it is really that much faster. The clock doesn't lie.
They came up with the new tire size so now you need to change your frame and other parts of your bike , $$$$ for companies.
Out of the last top 5 racers in this last World Cup, how many used 650b? What did Gee use ??? Just curious. Anyone?
Know what they called it? 650S. I think the world is laughing at us mountain bikers....
I'd like a 650b bike but chances are pretty good I'll keep my 26" bike for a while longer.
I'm not arguing that 650B is garbage. But now companies are releasing 650B bikes only, without keeping the 26" lineup.
The same was said about 29ers but as soon as the sales weren't what companies hoped for they ditched that sinking ship in favour of 650B which is more sellable as it is basically 26 which many years of MTB has established as a decent all round wheel size. When the global head of sales for someone like Giant comes out and says "we were wrong about 29ers, but 650B is definitely the future... promise" you realise the companies are facing an uphill battle to sell something inconvenient with little if any performance advantages.
The reason they don't make 26 is to give the customer no choice and force the change rather than actually bother to design something that justifies a change. Aggressive marketing driving change rather than customers given choice and deciding with their money. Since the 29er backtracking it would seem that the customers can actually drive the market even when given an all or nothing choice which is encouraging! The people chose "nothing"
As to 29ers, for XC racing and long distance marathon stage racing they're still very popular, but for AM trail riding less so (but Specialized and others who had long travel 29er bikes in development prior to the 650B explosion will keep pushing them regardless... they paid for the R&D and tooling so now they need to sell them).
currently riding an evil uprising 26-ER!!!!! what?
If by superior to 26" you mean heavier, doesn't turn as well, doesn't jump as well AND got beat , repeatedly, by 26" bikes last year... Then "Yes "650b is somehow better.
This year 650B will win a bunch of races. BECAUSE most of the co-conspirator bike companies will force their racers to use them...
Don't confuse that with 650b is faster or better.
Wheel weight is arguably the most important weight item on your bike because it's unsprung.
Bike companies know this too: that's why they always send out their test bikes with carbon wheels.
Santa Cruz for example.
As for grasping at any excuse for why it isn't better? Surely race results are not an excuse or grasping in any way shape or form.
And finally, I don't need to ride them when I am happy with my 26". This's like saying how do you know if you like being unhappy without trying it first.
You're right about wheel size being a preference.
In fact most 26"ers don't really care what wheel size people ride.
BUT, the bike companies are eliminating 26" bikes on the false grounds that 650b is "better."
There are trade offs and that's what makes them a preference.
Unfortunately the bike companies are seeing better rollover with 650B as being better, without acknowledging that that they are heavier, and more work to accelerate, turn and jump with.
Bike snobs.... Not really, we just want to continue to buy and ride what we like.
This report is more than a year old, but it accounts for all bike sales reported in canada by the suppliers listed (which included Rocky Mtn, Norco, Specialized, Giant, Trek and Kona) and it doesn't include ANY 650B sales because none of those brands had any models at the time.
www.canadiancyclist.com/races12/Supplier_Q3_2012.pdf
From July 2011 to July 2012 there was a 34% drop in all 26" wheel bike sales (which included comfort bikes and cruisers which saw increases). In that time period the 29er sales exploded increasing nearly TWO HUNDRED AND TWENTY percent. That's comparing one month of sales, one year apart. And 29ers were NOT by that time "the next big thing". They were the next big thing 10 years ago. Now look at the 3 quarter period (jan-sept) comparing 2011 to 2012...
26" Front suspension went from 53,703 units (worth $1,458,751) to 35,244 units (worth $802,532).
26" Dual Suspension went from 12,958 units (worth $1,086,842) to 10,344 units (worth $1,117,820).
29" bikes (both front suspension and dual combined) went from 7,722 units (worth $361,741) to 22,668 units (worth $1,035,461).
If you scroll down more you see they chart average unit prices... so not only did 26" front suspension drop in units but they also on average got cheaper (and still fell in sales). 26" dual dropped in units but increased in dollars because the average price rose. 29ers however dropped significantly in price and exploded in units sold. The reason for that is simple... consumers listen to sales staff, they listen to their friends, they read information (online or in print), but fundamentally they listen to their wallet... and if the average price of a 29er drops nearly $200 in one year... why would a consumer who the majority of the time is going to identify himself as a cross country rider, still pick a 26er ?!
Go further down the report and they chart accessories and parts... and its telling that while the bike suppliers in the report didn't have 650B models...the parts distributors listed DID carry 650B tires and tubes... and there's really no other likely explanation for why they suddenlly saw a 267% increase in "other" size tires from the Q1-Q3 periods of 2011 to 2012. That was more of an increase than happened with 29" tires. But you know what else happened in 2012? Oh this little swiss fellow started winning world cup races and world championships and olympic gold medals and such on 650B. And suddenlly EVERYONE had to have one. And thanks to the magic of the internet they'd have found the easiest way to have one without buying a whole new bike was to convert a bike they already owned... and to do that you need 4 critical pieces...2 tires, and 2 rims.
Just because a XC guy wins some races on a 650b, doesn't mean all the manufacturers are making a switch. Top 3 Enduro racers last year were on 26" so that blows your theory again. Industry is hyping the 650b for 3 reasons:
1. Sales are flat overall. Have to think of a way to sell more bikes.
2. Some manufacturers are late to the game with 29er or couldn't make a proper one
3. Some manufacturers are pretty much being forced to make 650b as the consumer is being brain washed that there is huge difference in performance.
Bike Mags Bible of Bike test www.bikemag.com/2014-bible-of-bike-tests/exclusive-2014-bible-of-bike-tests-begins watch the vids on the some of the 26ers that were tested. 650b... don't believe the hype.
You obviously don't know Seb... he shoots it straight. Don't be a sheeple.
Actually, the manufacturers are designing 650b to feel as much like a 26er as they can (geo wise) and with the benefit of roll over of the bigger wheels. Specialized did with the Enduro 29er.
Haro... there's a big market brand. So the brand manager ran 650b wheels on his 26er for 5 years? Some of your posts have so much bs I just have to call you on it.
And there it is. The solid proof that most of what deeeeeeight types is pure made up bull, spouted freely with no evidence given. How do you know you know more about frame design than jaydawg ever (will?) Is it perhaps cos that is what you would like to believe, so you just say it and pretend its true? A bit like saying 27.5 has ALL the advantages of 29" with NONE of the drawbacks. Its just words. meaningless words that would be nice if they were true, but sadly they aren't.
#1 you could just as easily put those big schwalbes on a 27.5 and say oh look I'm almost 28" Who cares?
#2 rims are VERY light compared to tires. Think 450g compared to 1000g. You don't get "almost 650b", you get 26 with really heavy tires.