Buying full squish, what's better?

PB Forum :: All Mountain, Enduro & Cross-Country
Buying full squish, what's better?
  • Previous Page
Author Message
flag KennyKonif
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 14:51 Quote
This not a brand vs. brand, but a geometry and travel question.

What's better?

29er with 140mm travel
Or
27.5 with 160mm travel
flag kona-jon
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 15:18 Quote
Have you considered 26 with 180mm?
flag Falcon991
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 16:06 Quote
I went the smaller wheel/ more travel route because I wanted to jump stuff and ride an agile bike. My own, nearly worthless opinion is that a 140mm 29er would roll better, go straight through rock gardens better but suffer in corners and braking by comparison.
Do you want to go faster in most pedaling situations or have more fun on downhills? 29 for the former, 27.5 for the latter.

Guys who know more than I do can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong...
flag Honduh2000
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 17:43 Quote
Maybe go with a bike that could use both 29 and 27.5 wheels like the new Devinci Troy.
flag DonLopez
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 17:54 Quote
Agree. A bike that can swap between 27.5 plus and 29 would be nice. As for suspension, I would rather too much travel than not enough; you can always stiffen/lockout the shocks. I chose 27.5 and 160/150 travel and happy with my my bike. If I were racing XC, I would want a 29 130/120 for where I ride.
flag rkats
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 18:36 Quote
27.5 Enduro Rig no brainer
flag lifted-d
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 18:53 Quote
It depends if your terrain imo. Idk where you are but are trails fast and smoother or gnarly shore cliff steep or what? Mix that with your ambitions/future plans.

I would go longer travel 27.5 as a do anything bike.
flag onemind123
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 19:27 Quote
Falcon991 wrote:
My own, nearly worthless opinion is that a 140mm 29er would roll better, go straight through rock gardens better but suffer in corners and braking by comparison.
..

How would a bigger wheel suffer in braking? Disc brakes have plenty of power to lock up a 26 or a 29 wheel - which is effectively maximum braking (ya ya, just before lockup is) so I can't see how one would be better at braking then the other?
flag KennyKonif
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 19:39 Quote
Thank you for the replies. Budget is about $2500-3000

I live in MN and the dirt is generally real tacky, due to humidity. Not much for rock features in my neck of the woods.

I do some downhill and XC. Been ripping it up on a 2011 trek hardtail and want this purchase to be the right one.

Rode BMX when I was a kid, just got addicted to MTB after blowing out my knee last summer. Great low impact (kinda) exercise.
flag sspiff
O+ FL
Posted: Jul 20, 2018 at 22:55 Quote
onemind123 wrote:
Falcon991 wrote:
My own, nearly worthless opinion is that a 140mm 29er would roll better, go straight through rock gardens better but suffer in corners and braking by comparison.
..

How would a bigger wheel suffer in braking? Disc brakes have plenty of power to lock up a 26 or a 29 wheel - which is effectively maximum braking (ya ya, just before lockup is) so I can't see how one would be better at braking then the other?

Braking is traction limited and big wheels have more tread in the ground, and hence more traction, which leads to better braking. Not sure where that original comment was coming from.
flag ntd14
Posted: Jul 21, 2018 at 3:09 Quote
KennyKonif wrote:
Thank you for the replies. Budget is about $2500-3000

I live in MN and the dirt is generally real tacky, due to humidity. Not much for rock features in my neck of the woods.

I do some downhill and XC. Been ripping it up on a 2011 trek hardtail and want this purchase to be the right one.

Rode BMX when I was a kid, just got addicted to MTB after blowing out my knee last summer. Great low impact (kinda) exercise.

It still kinda depends, first, if you are tall, like 6ft+ seriously consider a 29er regardless, if you are really short probably just go for the 275, if you are a medium height: if you ride jumps, tight - medium radius corners or low speed technical, chose a 275 if you ride high speed chudder such as high speed fire roads or are like 90% XC choose a 29.

Personally I am average height and really dislike 29ers (not that I think they are bad, they just dont suit my body and style), I have a very playful style of riding which suits smaller wheels, shorter reach and shorter wheel base, a more point and hold on style suits 29ers.

It is very much a personal thing, whether people realize it or not this is why the 26er crowed are pissed off, they don’t care about being fast, they want bikes they can throw around and have fun with and the industry is saying "No you must want to be a world cup racer, you need the latest 29er DH rig" when they just want a jump bike that can ride over rocks and not try too hard to kill them.

Also, dont buy into this weird you have bigger wheels so you dont need as much suspension sh*t, it makes no sense. Think about it, if you have to go over an obstetrical that is 150mm high, for the centre of mass to stay in a horizontal plane, the wheel must come up 150mm to go over the obstacle, all the angle of attack does is change how fast it must come up, it takes longer with a larger radius wheel as the distance from initial contact to maximum fork/shock compression is further (in the horizontal plane) but it is still 150mm in the vertical plane. What does change is rotational inertia, this is fairly substantial as rotational inertia is related to the square of the the radius of the circle, you can think of inertia as a resistance for something to change what it is doing. In a mountain bike wheel this is direction or rotational speed, 29ers are harder to turn and speed up/slow down than 275. A 29er will accelerate worse under peddling, but once it gets going will be less inclined to slow down when there are bumps etc in the trail, (with modern brakes both are fairly stoppable with high end brakes) but will be more resilient to changing direction, it wont want to go around corners as much, or go up jumps as much, it wants to go in a straight, flat line more because of the extra inertia of the wheels.

The next thing is geometry of the particular bike has more influence than travel now days. Longer lower bikes are the trend, they are more stable at high speeds hence why racers prefer them, the wheel base and BB height is the best indicator for this. Again personally I like short bikes with high BBs, they are more playful, but slower in today’s races. I am happy to write about geo more if you want, ask.

From what you have said, and having a little bit of an idea about what the geology is like in the MN in general, I would sugest looking for something like a slack short travel trail bike such as a transition scout or smuggler depending on your height and style.
flag gnarnaimo
O+ FL
Posted: Jul 21, 2018 at 7:24 Quote
A lot of over analysis in here.
Demo both, see what you prefer.
I find 29 funner and faster, and I do like to ride bike park and jump and whip n junk. That's just me.
flag BarneyStinson
Posted: Jul 22, 2018 at 10:03 Quote
Agree. Neither is "better" they're just different.
flag Camstyn
O+
Posted: Jul 22, 2018 at 12:53 Quote
I bought a 170mm Capra 27.5 thinking more is better. Not long after I added a 120mm 29er hardtail (Vanquish). My next bike will be a 120-140mm 29er such as a Smuggler, it would be all I need for 99% of the riding I do. The Capra is a handful and not a lot of fun except for when you’re hauling ass, then it is brilliant. The rest of the time it’s too much of a compromise.
  • Previous Page

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.014337
Mobile Version of Website